chuckd Posted January 27, 2015 Share Posted January 27, 2015 @ Jay Sata: Since you are obviously bereft of any knowledge concerning the extent to which young William Clinton went to avoid the draft, I am providing you two links. While they are somewhat lengthy I am hopeful you can maintain sufficient concentration to get through both of them and really find out what the truth is about Bill Clinton dodging the draft during the Vietnam war. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- The first link is to Snopes.com, where they label as 'FALSE' this statement concerning Clinton. "Claim: Bill Clinton was the "first pardoned federal felon ever to serve as President of the U.S." This statement was in fact false, but it hardly tells the whole story. Clinton was not convicted of a crime, nor was he charged, so he is not a felon. Having said that, his maneuvering around his local draft board was a classic case of how he became to be known as The Teflon President. http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/felon.asp ------------------------------------------------------------------------- The second link is Clinton's famous letter to Col. Holmes, ROTC Commander, in 1969. These are his words and detail his actions. http://www.nytimes.com/1992/02/13/us/1992-campaign-letter-clinton-his-draft-deferment-war-opposed-despised.html -------------------------------------------------------------------------- I hope you will take the time to see how a Democrat worked the system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Publicus Posted January 27, 2015 Share Posted January 27, 2015 Bill Clinton won twice, Willard Mitt Romney (his full name) lost the nomination campaign in 2008 and lost in 2012 as the nominee...yet the loser Romney is back again to torture his political party and possibly all Americans still some more loser campaigning. Bill Clinton was never a Vietnam war hawk. Willard's father George was former head of American Motors, had to quit the campaign for the R party nomination in 1968 because he said he'd been "brainwashed" into supporting the war, which he at that point no longer favored. No one in that family has any military service whatsoever...I will stand corrected if the local party secretary can show me otherwise.... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckd Posted January 27, 2015 Share Posted January 27, 2015 You are correct. He did use the word "brainwashed" but, like most talking points, it was taken out of context. George had visited Vietnam in 1965 and had been given briefings and tours provided by the US military commanders in Vietnam. Upon leaving there he felt the war was necessary and justified. In 1967 A Detroit television station was interviewing him and asked about his position on Vietnam. During the nearly two year interim, he had changed his mind as politicians are prone to do. (You know, for, against, for, against, for same sex marriage...of recent history) What he said was this: "When I came back from Viet Nam, I'd just had the greatest brainwashing that anybody can get." He added that after the trip, he made a deeper study of the history of the conflict and concluded that it had been a “tragic” blunder to get U.S. troops into an Asian land war and that in fact it hadn’t been necessary to send U.S. soldiers to prevent a Chinese takeover of Southeast Asia." http://www.minnpost.com/eric-black-ink/2011/12/politics-gaffe-recalling-brainwashing-george-romney The media blew it out of proportion and he dropped out. It was no more serious that most of Obama's many gaffes but he didn't have the media in his pocket. As usual, your sideshow has no legs. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay Sata Posted January 27, 2015 Share Posted January 27, 2015 Bush Romney etc. and even talk of Palin or Trump. Is this the best the GOP can muster. Looks to me like the Democrats could put a sack of potatoes in the White House if they wanted to. To win the Republican party's nomination you need to court the conservative right, but doing so will cost you the centre in a Presidential election and if you can't claim the centre, you aren't winning anything. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Publicus Posted January 27, 2015 Share Posted January 27, 2015 (edited) You are correct. He did use the word "brainwashed" but, like most talking points, it was taken out of context. George had visited Vietnam in 1965 and had been given briefings and tours provided by the US military commanders in Vietnam. Upon leaving there he felt the war was necessary and justified. In 1967 A Detroit television station was interviewing him and asked about his position on Vietnam. During the nearly two year interim, he had changed his mind as politicians are prone to do. (You know, for, against, for, against, for same sex marriage...of recent history) What he said was this: "When I came back from Viet Nam, I'd just had the greatest brainwashing that anybody can get." He added that after the trip, he made a deeper study of the history of the conflict and concluded that it had been a “tragic” blunder to get U.S. troops into an Asian land war and that in fact it hadn’t been necessary to send U.S. soldiers to prevent a Chinese takeover of Southeast Asia." http://www.minnpost.com/eric-black-ink/2011/12/politics-gaffe-recalling-brainwashing-george-romney The media blew it out of proportion and he dropped out. It was no more serious that most of Obama's many gaffes but he didn't have the media in his pocket. As usual, your sideshow has no legs. The post makes my point very well, thx. Which is that no Romney knows whatever it is he's on about. George the father had to get out of his presidential race in 1968 because he admitted to an entirely accepted "brainwashing" about the Vietnam conflict. Willard Mitt Romney the son (his full name) lost his shots at it after such whoppers as self-deport, then the 47% and YES women in binders (binders full of women ) and these are only among some of Mitt's greatest hits of 2012. Remember the, "I enjoy firing people." ? There's more a-commin....."After I lost in 2012 people treated me as if I was the landscaper," is just a warmup for Willard....how to win votes and influence people The Biggest Mitt Romney Gaffes http://www.ranker.com/list/the-biggest-mitt-romney-gaffes/keaton And let's remember this is a thread about Willard Mitt Romney and the Republican party in the race for president.. Edited January 27, 2015 by Publicus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Traveler19491 Posted January 27, 2015 Share Posted January 27, 2015 (edited) <script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script> Bush Romney etc. and even talk of Palin or Trump.Is this the best the GOP can muster.Looks to me like the Democrats could put a sack of potatoes in the White House if they wanted to.To win the Republican party's nomination you need to court the conservative right, but doing so will cost you the centre in a Presidential election and if you can't claim the centre, you aren't winning anything. True. The Republicans had such success in the mid-terms due mostly to the fact that the center tends to mostly ignore mid-terms, and it's pretty much the hard core that votes, and hard core conservatives turn out in much larger numbers than Democrats. Add to that the fact that most Democratic candidates in the most recent mid-terms were, for some reason, convinced that aligning themselves with Obama would not be a good idea, and they had little to run on. However, the upcoming Presidential election will be a totally different ball of wax, I'm thinking. The first week in office with their new majority, and what did Republicans do? Took dead aim at Social Security, abortion, and trying to throw out even more overtime protections for regular workers. Yes, they absolutely have the average person's best interests at heart. If they are not very, very careful, the Democrats are going to have super tankers full of ammunition to use against them. It's most likely that Obama will continue bringing up populist suggestions/programs that appeal to the middle and working classes, and programs to help the poor and reform immigration, the Republicans will shoot them all down, as well as continue blocking nominations and anything else that he wants done. The Republicans will continue to alienate African Americans, women, Latinos, and minorities of all stripes, all of whom are near to eclipsing white Americans as a majority. This is all going to make for ridiculously easy attack adds in 2016. Edited January 27, 2015 by Traveler19491 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Publicus Posted January 27, 2015 Share Posted January 27, 2015 (edited) <script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script> Bush Romney etc. and even talk of Palin or Trump. Is this the best the GOP can muster. Looks to me like the Democrats could put a sack of potatoes in the White House if they wanted to. To win the Republican party's nomination you need to court the conservative right, but doing so will cost you the centre in a Presidential election and if you can't claim the centre, you aren't winning anything. True. The Republicans had such success in the mid-terms due mostly to the fact that the center tends to mostly ignore mid-terms, and it's pretty much the hard core that votes, and hard core conservatives turn out in much larger numbers than Democrats. Add to that the fact that most Democratic candidates in the most recent mid-terms were, for some reason, convinced that aligning themselves with Obama would not be a good idea, and they had little to run on. However, the upcoming Presidential election will be a totally different ball of wax, I'm thinking. The first week in office with their new majority, and what did Republicans do? Took dead aim at Social Security, abortion, and trying to throw out even more overtime protections for regular workers. Yes, they absolutely have the average person's best interests at heart. If they are not very, very careful, the Democrats are going to have super tankers full of ammunition to use against them. It's most likely that Obama will continue bringing up populist suggestions/programs that appeal to the middle and working classes, and programs to help the poor and reform immigration, the Republicans will shoot them all down, as well as continue blocking nominations and anything else that he wants done. The Republicans will continue to alienate African Americans, women, Latinos, and minorities of all stripes, all of whom are near to eclipsing white Americans as a majority. This is all going to make for ridiculously easy attack adds in 2016. Very well analyzed and presented if a bit heavy on the political consultant aspects of it. Speaker Boehner is an idiot whose track record as speaker is a long wreckage of disasters yet he's already begun to surpass his worst moments of the past with historic gaffes of policy, process, procedure, from trying to deport immigrant parents of children citizens to inviting a foreign leader to a joint session of Congress to disagree with the president and much more.. Boehner is already showing he's taking Mitch McConnell down with him. I'd thought Sen McConnell had more political savvy than to let a klutz like Boehner drag him down, but then again Mitch McConnell is from Kentucky. The 2016 campaign is only beginning to take shape yet it already looks like the turkey shoot that it was the last couple of times, so let's hope the Rs throw Mitt Romney into the middle of 'em all...again. Edited January 27, 2015 by Publicus 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Publicus Posted January 27, 2015 Share Posted January 27, 2015 And let's remember this is a thread about Willard Mitt Romney and the Republican party in the race for president.. Meaning please ignore all the silly gaffes that Barack Obama and Joe Biden have made. They won. Twice. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicog Posted January 27, 2015 Share Posted January 27, 2015 Romney lost the presidential election. He has been successful at numerous other things and is fabulously wealthy due to his own efforts. Very successful at looking after his mates and avoiding paying tax. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Traveler19491 Posted January 27, 2015 Share Posted January 27, 2015 <script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script> Of course. For most Republicans, their dislike of the man in the White House has nothing to do with him being "black". Ulysses, for the most part I have a reasonably high regard for your comments. You are one of the few thinking conservatives on here, but I have to call you on this one. A party that is amenable to the likes of Ted Nugent, who called Obama a "subhuman mongrel", and then invites him to their fund raisers, and is OK with having Steve Scalese, who spoke to a white supremacist group, be the majority whip, and ne'er a word of condemnation, is a party that has most definitely got problems with a black DEMOCRAT being President. Yes, they would back Carson, or Rice, were they to win the primaries, but that would only be because they had no choice. There have been way too many comments about Obama's race from the lunatic fringe of the Republican party, with only feigned disavowal coming from the powers that be, for anyone to seriously believe that the Republicans totally embrace a black man as President. They never really even liked Colin Powell. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metisdead Posted January 27, 2015 Share Posted January 27, 2015 An off topic post has been removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Publicus Posted January 30, 2015 Share Posted January 30, 2015 In about an hour Romney will say he's is out of the race for the Republican party nomination for prez again. NBC News in the US is reporting that some conservative radio station in the midwest with close connections to Romney's top people says Mitt will announce he will not run again because the R party needs new faces....I'd say it needs new names too. NBC News now confirms the report as true and factual as I write the post. Willard Mitt Romney is going home to stay home....out of the race for the R party nomination 2016. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phrodan Posted January 30, 2015 Share Posted January 30, 2015 He's not running - which can't be a shock. Always had a smell of loser about him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckd Posted January 30, 2015 Share Posted January 30, 2015 (edited) The Wall St. Journal editorial page took a big swipe at Romney yesterday. Maybe Rupert Murdoch is supporting Jeb Bush? Thai visa's conservative warriors are going to have to get in line. The boss as spoken... http://www.businessinsider.com/murdoch-i-thought-romney-was-a-terrible-candidate-2015-1 Romney isn't going to be the Republican nominee. You folks can make all the conjecture you want. He ain't gonna happen. By the way, who is going to run on the Democratic side of the aisle? There is some doubt about Hillary: EDITORIAL WARNING ; COULD CAUSE DAMAGE TO LIBERAL BRAINS Why Hillary Clinton won’t run for president By Wesley Pruden - - Thursday, January 15, 2015 Hillary can’t win, and that’s why she won’t run. She may not know that yet herself, but a lot of Democrats want her because she’s all they’ve got. The Republicans are counting on her to run because they think she’s the candidate they can beat in what looks from here like it could be a Republican year. Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jan/15/wesley-pruden-why-hillary-clinton-wont-run-for-pre/#ixzz3P3Sj9cSS This is what I said two weeks ago: "Romney isn't going to be the Republican nominee. You folks can make all the conjecture you want. He ain't gonna happen." When are you people going to start listening to me? Edited January 30, 2015 by chuckd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Publicus Posted January 30, 2015 Share Posted January 30, 2015 (edited) Not anytime soon....... The D party is odds-on favorite to win the election in November 2016 no matter who the R party nominates. You could sound like you were the only person at the thread who knew what everyone else knew, that Willard is a loser. What, did you specifically place your post in tactical reserve for this very occasion? Edited January 30, 2015 by Publicus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phrodan Posted January 30, 2015 Share Posted January 30, 2015 The Wall St. Journal editorial page took a big swipe at Romney yesterday. Maybe Rupert Murdoch is supporting Jeb Bush? Thai visa's conservative warriors are going to have to get in line. The boss as spoken... http://www.businessinsider.com/murdoch-i-thought-romney-was-a-terrible-candidate-2015-1 Romney isn't going to be the Republican nominee. You folks can make all the conjecture you want. He ain't gonna happen. By the way, who is going to run on the Democratic side of the aisle? There is some doubt about Hillary: EDITORIAL WARNING ; COULD CAUSE DAMAGE TO LIBERAL BRAINS Why Hillary Clinton won’t run for president By Wesley Pruden - - Thursday, January 15, 2015 Hillary can’t win, and that’s why she won’t run. She may not know that yet herself, but a lot of Democrats want her because she’s all they’ve got. The Republicans are counting on her to run because they think she’s the candidate they can beat in what looks from here like it could be a Republican year. Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jan/15/wesley-pruden-why-hillary-clinton-wont-run-for-pre/#ixzz3P3Sj9cSS This is what I said two weeks ago: "Romney isn't going to be the Republican nominee. You folks can make all the conjecture you want. He ain't gonna happen." When are you people going to start listening to me? Congratulations in calling a 50/50 choice right. It's plain to see that you are a genius. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Publicus Posted January 30, 2015 Share Posted January 30, 2015 Indeed, the WSJ said it first, basically as another poster had taken the initiative to point out. The ever so prescient post soon followed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeverSure Posted January 30, 2015 Share Posted January 30, 2015 Bush Romney etc. and even talk of Palin or Trump. Is this the best the GOP can muster. Looks to me like the Democrats could put a sack of potatoes in the White House if they wanted to. To win the Republican party's nomination you need to court the conservative right, but doing so will cost you the centre in a Presidential election and if you can't claim the centre, you aren't winning anything. To win the Republican Democrat party's nomination you need to court the conservative right far-out, wild-eyed looney left, but doing so will cost you the centre in a Presidential election and if you can't claim the centre, you aren't winning anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicog Posted January 30, 2015 Share Posted January 30, 2015 (edited) In about an hour Romney will say he's is out of the race for the Republican party nomination for prez again. NBC News in the US is reporting that some conservative radio station in the midwest with close connections to Romney's top people says Mitt will announce he will not run again because the R party needs new faces....I'd say it needs new names too. NBC News now confirms the report as true and factual as I write the post. Willard Mitt Romney is going home to stay home....out of the race for the R party nomination 2016. I don't think anyone not on the Koch's $900 million Xmas card list should even bother. http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/01/mitt-romney-koch-brothers-donor-network Washington (CNN)Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney will not make a third run for president, he told supporters on a Friday morning call, saying he believes it's "best to give other leaders in the party the opportunity" to become the nominee. Edited January 30, 2015 by Chicog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Publicus Posted January 30, 2015 Share Posted January 30, 2015 Bush Romney etc. and even talk of Palin or Trump. Is this the best the GOP can muster. Looks to me like the Democrats could put a sack of potatoes in the White House if they wanted to. To win the Republican party's nomination you need to court the conservative right, but doing so will cost you the centre in a Presidential election and if you can't claim the centre, you aren't winning anything. To win the Republican Democrat party's nomination you need to court the conservative right far-out, wild-eyed looney left, but doing so will cost you the centre in a Presidential election and if you can't claim the centre, you aren't winning anything. Barack Obama won the greatest percentage of the popular vote twice, the highest percentage of a two-time winner since Prez Eisenhower who had been the last prez to have done it, in 1952 and 1956. FDR had done it before Ike. It's the Republican party that does not have a center any more and could't find the American political center with both hands under bright lights and if it had a big X on it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Publicus Posted January 30, 2015 Share Posted January 30, 2015 In about an hour Romney will say he's is out of the race for the Republican party nomination for prez again. NBC News in the US is reporting that some conservative radio station in the midwest with close connections to Romney's top people says Mitt will announce he will not run again because the R party needs new faces....I'd say it needs new names too. NBC News now confirms the report as true and factual as I write the post. Willard Mitt Romney is going home to stay home....out of the race for the R party nomination 2016. I don't think anyone not on the Koch's $900 million Xmas card list should even bother. http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/01/mitt-romney-koch-brothers-donor-network Washington (CNN)Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney will not make a third run for president, he told supporters on a Friday morning call, saying he believes it's "best to give other leaders in the party the opportunity" to become the nominee. That and the fact the Bushes had closed off a lot of the money sources Willard needed to have were crippling his prospects. Also during the three weeks Willard had been venturing about the country the rank and file Republican reaction to him was strongly negative, as reflected in the spin he gave to his departure comments that it's time for the "next generation" of Rs to come forward. Too many Rs at the community level didn't want to hear him or see him yet again. The 'next generation' thing also meant Willard took a swipe at JebBush and the Bush family and its presidents....Jeb and Willard haven't been the best of friends and Jeb laid it out to Willard at their face to face a few days ago. Bush had already signed up a lot of Romney 2012 staff in a number of key primary states with more coming on board. Bush is indeed another guy who has very serious problems with the party regulars for several reasons, his brother George W and the family being but one. This improves things for two governors, Chris Christie of NJ and Scott Walker of WI, and one senator, Marco Rubio of FL. None of 'em appeal to the demographics of the new electorate that elected Barack Obama and which has former SecState Hillary Clinton solidly ahead in every and all respected survey polls every time going on a year now. Republican voters want a new face because all of these faces are too politically ugly to even them, nevermind to the Independent voters who swing the elections to the D for prez anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckd Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 Romney isn't going to be the Republican nominee. You folks can make all the conjecture you want. He ain't gonna happen. By the way, who is going to run on the Democratic side of the aisle? There is some doubt about Hillary: EDITORIAL WARNING ; COULD CAUSE DAMAGE TO LIBERAL BRAINS Why Hillary Clinton won’t run for president By Wesley Pruden - - Thursday, January 15, 2015 Hillary can’t win, and that’s why she won’t run. She may not know that yet herself, but a lot of Democrats want her because she’s all they’ve got. The Republicans are counting on her to run because they think she’s the candidate they can beat in what looks from here like it could be a Republican year. Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jan/15/wesley-pruden-why-hillary-clinton-wont-run-for-pre/#ixzz3P3Sj9cSS This is what I said two weeks ago: "Romney isn't going to be the Republican nominee. You folks can make all the conjecture you want. He ain't gonna happen." When are you people going to start listening to me? Congratulations in calling a 50/50 choice right. It's plain to see that you are a genius. I see you're building up that post count. You're not helping your credibility, though. Perhaps you should try another tack. Laying off for two weeks and then giving the game up might work quite well for you. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 Off-topic posts removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
.thumb.png.76be522b3b43e7458166b9dac9e422ed.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now