"There is one thing that is starting to impress itself on my mind - that the members of the military are starting to have a monumental contempt for the Democrats."

There are others (many others) that have equal contempt for the Republicans. Sorry Mark, You don't speak for all of the troops, nobody does when it comes to politics.

Talk about putting words in peoples mouths. This broad statement of yours that "democrats [think] the servicemembers are "poor children" who got suckered into Bush's evil and stupid war" is plainly not true.

Granted, most Democrats have the utmost sympathy for those being asked to put their lives on the line for a war Democrats don't believe in, but IN NO WAY does that equate to contempt or disrespect for any of the combat troops, who are indeed very brave men and women who deserve our utmost respect.

As for your prediction of massive numbers of votes going to republicans, let's just see how the veterans feel after they've been home for a few years to a care system that's been run down, scrapped health benefits and in some cases being told "Thanks for your service, you're now out of a job." See how they feel about the way this administration treats them on their return, and I think we'll see your vote prediction is far off the mark.

Oh, and by the way, since you put my previous account into moderation before posting, in order to try and gag me, I've created a new typekey account. Since I have googlemail I can create unlimited accounts. Instead of trying to gag me, why don't you actually debate me, as is the supposed purpose of the blog... or does the fact that I've been to Iraq and you haven't, so I know first hand what it's like out there and you don't scare you too much?

Mark,
There is one other point I would like to make. I find it shameful when a politician (Democrat or Republican) uses our troops as props. If Bush or anyone else visits our troops in the hospitals, on the bases, or in a war zone they are supporting them. As soon as they turn it into a photo op, they are using them. While I'm sure the two soldiers were proud to be there, how many soldiers are going to turn down a request to jog with the CIC. If he had just gone for a run with them I would be applauding him for his support, but the minute he stepped in front of the cameras and announced a new policy, he was using them as props.

PS,

Your arrogance is overwhleming in type, and I hope that it isn't quite as bad in person, otherwise you may be single for quite some time...no disrespect, just an observation.

Who said the following PS: "If a young fella has an option of having a decent career or joining the army to fight in Iraq, you can bet your life that he would not be in Iraq."
Ummm...it wasn't a Republican.

What Mr. Rangel is saying here is that "only a fool would join the military" and since I have yet to hear a Republican make such an abhorrent statement, and since he pretty much called you and my Son "fools", I'd have to assume that many other Democrats feel the same, and I'm outraged by this language! Correct me if I'm wrong, but many other Dems have said the same. Now you may consider this OT, but I don't. I believe that the Democrat party had all but shut the doors on our military during the Clinton era (GB 41 wasn't much better) and now that we are at war, those that squandered the opportunity to raise the bar, blew it for their political futures.

My point here is that by the tone of your criticisim, you appear to have no faith in the system, which is hard to believe since the two runners are proof that the system works...at least for two, plus my Son and you. So what's your beef?

My opinion falls into line with Mark's final sentence: "These men, and their like, deserve the best of our nation and we should all work to see that they get it."

My thought here is, that they, including you, deserve the best going in and the best coming out..period. Which my Son--who served in the Gulf, twice--and is now out and going to school, paid for by us taxpayers at the UofT in Austin and who wholeheartedly appreciates the opportunity believes that the Navy experience was well worth the nine years, deserve our gratitude and our financial support.

But to be called a "fool" by our Dem politicians shows a level of contempt from the Dem party that is not shown by Republicans.

BTW PS, have you ever anything positive to say??

Ever tried bass fishing? It's a great stress reliever.

Who said the following PS: "If a young fella has an option of having a decent career or joining the army to fight in Iraq, you can bet your life that he would not be in Iraq."

What Mr. Rangel is saying here is that "only a fool would join the military" and since I have yet to hear a Republican make such an abhorrent statement, and since he pretty much called you and my Son "fools"

Posted by navydad at July 26, 2007 12:10 PM

The only person I see calling the troops 'fools' is you, navydad.

Huh?

Hey, Daddy-o
Bass fishing is for rednecks!

From a kook like you Sal, I'll take that as a complement...LOL!

BTW PS, have you ever anything positive to say??

Sadly, navydad, Sarah is like almost every liberal I know: lost in a fog of negativity. Classic Liberalism (back when you and I were kids) used to be about solving problems and advancing civilization -- about progress. Now they call themselves "Progressives", but they are anything but "for progress". They are all about victimhood and placing blame on their political adversaries for what they perceive to be life's inequities; inequities that, of course, would cease to exist if only they were in total control. Actually solving problems would simply rob them of their power, and so they avoid doing that like the plague.

We have only Sarah's word that she (if she really is a she) is who she says she is, has been where she says she's been and done what she says she's done. The following glaring red flag in her post leads me to believe that she's just another Leftist fraud:

Oh, and by the way, since you put my previous account into moderation before posting, in order to try and gag me, I've created a new typekey account. Since I have googlemail I can create unlimited accounts.

Sounds like a psychopathic stalker to me, one who deserves neither respect nor a response.

"There are others (many others) that have equal contempt for the Republicans. Sorry Mark, You don't speak for all of the troops, nobody does when it comes to politics." - Casper

Actually, they speak for themselves. A small fraction identify as Democrat in polls. That was 16% last year. The percentage is lower in the Army and Marine Corps - you know, the people join knowing damn well they're going to Iraq. The coming release of several "anti-war" movies will make it worse. Mostly because (having never served themselves) Hollywood is making these movies "anti-war" by making them anti-military and anti-veteran. They did the same thing after Viet Nam. Notably, this will be the first time they do it while the war is still going on.

Lets review some of the things Democrats have called soldiers and Marines; Nazi's, thugs, stormtroopers, murderers.... Maybe someone on he left needs to get a copy of "How to Win Friends and Influence People"?

Many feel that liberals and the liberal press made us lose a war in Viet Nam that we could have won. Millions died in the region in the aftermath. Many feel now that it is happening again. You are trying to make us lose a war we can win and you are blind to the deaths and carnage that will happen in the aftermath. I tend to agree with this view.

CO

Where do you see me calling the troops "fools"?
Or is this some pathetic way of trying to shift guilt to an innocent party?

Who said the following PS: "If a young fella has an option of having a decent career or joining the army to fight in Iraq, you can bet your life that he would not be in Iraq."
Ummm...it wasn't a Republican.

That's a really interesting twisting of some badly chosen words.

What I think he was trying to say was, "If a person had a choice of a career with long life prospects, health benefits and very little danger, rather than being told that because he was poor the only practical thing to do would be to join the army, he would probably choose not to join the army."

This just illustrates the gap between well off and less well off. The well off sit on their backsides all day, with their expensive PCs and their high speed internet and fight the war on the net. The less well off can only support their families by signing up to go and potentially be injured or killed. IN NO WAY was the quoted person wanting to disparage the troops, though granted he could have chosen his words much better (and he's not the only one to goof words in this way, Republicans do it just as often) he was wanting to point out that the rich get to choose whether they fight or not. The poor can't be that picky.

His comments in a way are shown to be accurate by the number of high school drop outs that are being recruited to fill the ranks.

Dissing the troops? No. Dissing the RICH? Yes.

Mark, you are aware that most of that republican support is going the way of Ron Paul, who has never supported the Iraq war.

We have only Sarah's word that she (if she really is a she) is who she says she is, has been where she says she's been and done what she says she's done.

Whereas what? You don't even dare SAY you've been to Iraq during the present conflict. Take me at my word or not, it means nothing to me. What I find more telling is the bulk of pro-war posters here don't actually have any firsthand experience. At best they have a relative serving, at worst they just go by media reports.

Quite frankly I don't care if you believe me or not, because I already know a lot of people live in a cozy bubble that's comfortable to them, where anything uncomfortable isn't allowed to penetrate. I've seen what I've seen, I know what I know - first hand - and at least I'm brave enough to say if you have any doubts, enlist, tell me when you're going over there, and we'll exchange email addresses and I'll see you in Iraq, because I do have the option to revolunteer and unlike most of the posters here I'm seriously considering doing that.

Can't be any more positive than that, can I?

"There are others (many others) that have equal contempt for the Republicans. Sorry Mark, You don't speak for all of the troops, nobody does when it comes to politics." - Casper

Actually, they speak for themselves. A small fraction identify as Democrat in polls. That was 16% last year. The percentage is lower in the Army and Marine Corps - you know, the people join knowing damn well they're going to Iraq. The coming release of several "anti-war" movies will make it worse. Mostly because (having never served themselves) Hollywood is making these movies "anti-war" by making them anti-military and anti-veteran. They did the same thing after Viet Nam. Notably, this will be the first time they do it while the war is still going on.

Lets review some of the things Democrats have called soldiers and Marines; Nazi's, thugs, stormtroopers, murderers.... Maybe someone on he left needs to get a copy of "How to Win Friends and Influence People"?

Many feel that liberals and the liberal press made us lose a war in Viet Nam that we could have won. Millions died in the region in the aftermath. Many feel now that it is happening again. You are trying to make us lose a war we can win and you are blind to the deaths and carnage that will happen in the aftermath. I tend to agree with this view.

Robert,

That story was bogus - too small a sample, and it included civilian employees of the DoD. Not worth the paper its been printed on, nor the bandwith it takes on the 'net.

PS,

Even if we take you at your word, you would still only have a narrow and out-of-date view of the situation on the ground in Iraq. From several different sources currently in-country, I get the story that things are improving rapidly.

Spook,

PS's last post is proof of her liberal mentality...no doubt.

PS, you need to watch Charlie Rangel's rant first before trying to psychoanalyze his comments into liberal spin.

Here's the site, watch him yourself:
http://hotair.com/archives/2006/11/26/video-rangel-says-men-join-the-army-only-if-they-cant-have-a-decent-career/

Rangel states while advocating the draft:
"I want to make it abundantly clear: if there’s anyone who believes that these youngsters want to fight, as the Pentagon and some generals have said, you can just forget about it. No young, bright individual wants to fight just because of a bonus and just because of educational benefits. And most all of them come from communities of very, very high unemployment. If a young fella has an option of having a decent career or joining the army to fight in Iraq, you can bet your life that he would not be in Iraq.

Hmm.. sounds to me like he's saying no one would want to go to Iraq to fight. Wrong, I can name at least ten people that I know personally or have heard about, including Pat Tillman, that have either enlisted to fight, or re-enlisted to go back and fight.

What say you PS?

I'm beginning to believe your initial post here at B4B was a socialist slant that was twisted to sound centrist. However, as dumb and hick as you may think we are, we hicks can smell a snake oil salesperson (PC, don't ya know) a mile away.

So, which is it PS? Was Pat Tillman a fool or a patriot, or how about all those that enlisted post 911? What about my Son, who enlisted to serve his country first and did nine years with two re-enlistments, or didn't you understand Military-God-Country as your mantra....hmmm?

The problem with the Democrats is they treat the soldiers like victims. They are not victims, they are warriors. When they finally realise that, maybe the military will start to vote Democrat again.

Sorry to be OT Mark, but I just realized something extremely germane to the discussion regarding "who" is best suited as POTUS, that I wanted to share. So if you feel the subject is out of line with the thread, I'll bring it up later..if I can remember.

If Hitlery has so much experience with foreign leaders, as she claims, and she has so much experience with domestic affairs, as she claims, then why would she question the Pentagon over an Iraq withdrawl plan?

She's obviously much more knowledgable than Obama or GWB, or claims to be, so why question whether a plan was in place or not, when she absolutley knew what the response would be? I mean she was in the WH for eight years, she ought to know, wouldn't ya say.

Just like she said before we invaded Iraq, "Saddam poses a threat that we've known about for years", (I'm paraphrasing).

So if she's "in the know", why ask?

Sounds to me like she's picking a fight to support her new "run away" strategy.

CO

Where do you see me calling the troops "fools"?

Posted by: navydad at July 26, 2007 01:58 PM

Well, in Mr. Rangel's quote, I don't see the word 'fools' at all; but there it is, clear & unmistakable, in your 'interpretation' of his remarks. Are you projecting, navydad?

By the way, the troops go where they are sent. No argument.

Their personal opinion about the specific conflicts in which they are engaged does not enter the equation. They enlist, they serve; regardless of the mistakes of the CIC.

No CO, you're twisting and squirming because you know I'm right!

You can't get outa this one neighbor...LOL!
Only a first grader would interpret his comments the way you have...with all due-not do, or dew-respect.

Kahn,
The same poll has only 35% of the military approving of the way Bush has handled the war. Only 37% feel we should have gone to Iraq to begin with.
Between the 2005 and 2006 polls, the percentage of democrats rose from 13 to 16%. The number of republicans dropped from 56% to 46%. The poll was taken 8 or 9 months ago. Want to make a bet on what direction the next one goes?

"Democrats have called soldiers and Marines; Nazi's, thugs, stormtroopers, murderers...."

They have also called them heroes, fathers, mothers, sons, and daughters. The number of democrats who have described as thugs or worse are a very small minority.

felixhelix or is that foregetmeknockt?

Please go away. You're not fooling anyone and your website stinks...so pack it in sonny.

Lets review some of the things Democrats have called soldiers and Marines; Nazi's, thugs, stormtroopers, murderers....

And do you honestly think for a minute Kahn, that these disgusting remarks towards our men and women in uniform represent the majority of what the Democrats think?

Somehow, I highly doubt that.

I agree with the sentiment that true "support for the troops" ends when you use them for political leverage. Both parties have been perpetrators of this injustice, but Republicans seem to be doing more often. I mean, this president staged an e-conference with troops, is sure to have uniformed soldiers at every event that is military related, and is sure to point out whenever he goes jogging with wounded veterans. In return, his policies have lead to extended tours (the longest tours in history if I'm not mistaken), a deteriorating VA system, and a loss of benefits. Supporting the troops? I'll believe it when I see it.

Rana,

Well that certainly is an interesting and different "twist" (spin) on the information, even if I don't agree with your conclusion!

AAR

Right! Sounds like a re-run.

Take a hike. Even if I'm wrong, take a hike.

8mil states:
"but Republicans seem to be doing more often"

Umm...could it be that the Republicans are the party that supports our troops and since our Military is predominantly Republican, maybe they care to hear from their Republican leader now and then.

To spin this as some political stunt by Republicans would be like stealing it from the Dem. play book.

navydad,
I don't see it as a Republican thing. both parties do it. The Republicans are probably doing it more now because they have the CIC, but it's in both parties playbook. I personally find it unseemly. How would you have felt if Clinton used your son as a prop while he was making a speech about Bosnia (for all I know maybe he did). My daughter joined the army for many reasons: sense of duty, education benefits, adventure, etc. I don't think political prop was on the list.

navydad-

You know... your parsing of my sentence is quite funny... It basically translates to:

Republicans support the troops, so they use them as political leverage...

Wow... I'm actually finding myself writing a short comment...

Hmmm... "old man" eh? kennscht mi noch? used to say the same thing.

Which ideas...sonny?

Casper - yes. I knew if someone actually looked it up they would see that more than twice as many military claim to be Republican than Democrat. And I knew that percentage was down.

Think it was down because the Republicans were too conservative - or too liberal? Think about it.

Fact is Just under half of the military express a preference- and 2/3'rds of those that do express a preference claim to be Republican. Ahhhh, statistics.

Going in was a mistake? Yes. But not based on what we thought we knew at the time. Don't like the way we handled it? Yes. Most think we should have had twice as many people (or more). Don't make the mistake of thinking that because they disapprove, it means they agree with YOU.

You list some of the good things some Democrats have said. Good. But you can't find the kind of bile from Republicans like that thrown at the military from the left. You can't find pictures of people on the right burning American soldiers in effigy. If you don't think the military has a real hatred of the left, you are sadly mistaken.

Oh, and 16% of the total military (Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force, and Coast Guard) claim to be Democrat. I wonder what the percentage in the Army and Marines is? You really think a Marine enlisting now or for the last three years didn't know he or she was probably going to Iraq? The Marine Corps has publicly stated that they want 100% of its people to have served there or in Afghanistan or both.

I strongly suggest a visit to the new Museum of the Marine Corps at Quantico.

Bout time 8mil...LOL!

Casper

Let's face the fact that the Dems are the ones calling for retreat, opposing victory, prematurely admitting defeat, and doing their best to embolden our enemy...come on, it doesn't take a brain surgeon to know when our soldiers are being stabbed in the back by his/her own politicians. Conversely, Republicans are placing their political careers on the line by supporting a very difficult war. Not all, but the majority. This seems intellectually dishonest... coming from you Casper!

BTW, after Clinton raped and pillaged our Military, there's no doubt most stand-out soldiers/heros post Bosnia avoided him like the plague. In fact, I can't remember one instance where he met with vets for photo ops. But I may be wrong, so please correct me if I am.

Navydad,
Maybe I haven't been clear on the point I'm trying to make, so I will try again.

I feel it's wrong to use members of our armed forces as political props by politicians of ANY party. I know that members of both parties do it. I'm not blaming one party over another. I also know there are members of both parties (including Bush) who have taken the time to visit the troops, in the hospital and in the field. That's great.

So here is my question to you. Do you think it's proper for politicians from either party to use our troops as props?

Navydad,

That would have to be a "Dumbest Democratic Statement" thread, but there ain't enough bandwidth in the whole internet to support it...as soon as technology makes its next quantum leap, then we'll do that.

Casper,

As CinC, President Bush has a duty to appear with the troops - and as we're at war, he has to do it a lot.

On a day when we're moving forward to fix the problems at VA (which, by the way, will never be 100% fixed...because the VA, like the rest of the world, is staffed by human beings and thus there will always be things going wrong), it was right and proper for the President to appear with a couple of our troops who have been through more hell than any of us, and who are still standing strong and proud as American warriors.

What you seem to want is that the President never get any credit for the position he holds - this is pre-emptive Democratic thinking: I know full well that as the troops come home next year, the Democrats will be demanding that the President stop greeting them upon arrival home.