Cain
Straussian
Vote for Joe Walsh: His ideas have legs.
james gang > the eagles
This reminds me of what they did to Max Cleland.
That was my initial thought. It got pretty ugly on this forum with some of the wing-nuts defending the attacks on Cleland.
Daredelvis
This falls into line with their strategy trying to make their opponents strength become their weakness. This was very evident in the Swift Boating of Kerry.I was surprised and yet unsurprised.
The GOP has used military service/service members as a cudgel against those it deems unpatriotic for years, wrapping themselves in the flag while doing it. And then this sort of thing happens...
I'm aware people will try to make money off the actions of others.It happens when a douchebag attacks the troops.
What is the default position if the GOP when it comes to supporting the troops, and how does this demonstrate it's empty and that most GOP'ers "don't give a god damn about the troops." That sounds like an awfully broad brush you're using.It demonstrates the emptiness of the default position of the GOP to support our troops. Most don't give a god damn about the troops.
Who are these people?Interesting that there are people who can't simply step up and say "yeah, the guy is a grade a prick he is".
Well, "the one" was the OP.Okay. There's one. Hardly the whole thread. Grizzly's claim has just a wee tad of hyperbole.
Well, "the one" was the OP.
I'm somewhat surprised that a thread that is nothing more than a plea to donate money to a political candidate has seen this much action.
Are you also aware that some people like Walsh are also douchebags?I'm aware people will try to make money off the actions of others.
Very broad. I grant you all of it. It's only my opinion based on my anecdotal experiences. When it comes time to step up and actually help the troops with policy then we typically here nothing but crickets from the GOP. Just how it was with the first responders to 9/11. They had to be shamed into providing additional health care funding.What is the default position if the GOP when it comes to supporting the troops, and how does this demonstrate it's empty and that most GOP'ers "don't give a god damn about the troops." That sounds like an awfully broad brush you're using.
Very broad. I grant you all of it. It's only my opinion based on my anecdotal experiences. When it comes time to step up and actually help the troops with policy then we typically here nothing but crickets from the GOP. Just how it was with the first responders to 9/11. They had to be shamed into providing additional health care funding.
Okay. There's one. Hardly the whole thread. Grizzly's claim has just a wee tad of hyperbole.
WALSH: Understand something about John McCain. His political advisers, day after day, had to take him and almost throw him against a wall and hit him against the head and say, “Senator, you have to let people know you served! You have to talk about what you did!” He didn’t want to do it, wouldn’t do it. Day after day they had to convince him. Finally, he talked a little bit about it, but it was very uncomfortable for him. That’s what’s so noble about our heroes. Now I’m running against a woman who, my God, that’s all she talks about. [pretty long pause here] Our true heroes, it’s the last thing in the world they talk about. That’s why we’re so indebted and in awe of what they’ve done.
What's another reasonable inference?Since the OP didn't link the actual quote, it's from an Elk Grove townhall meeting here.
Actual words on youtube, posted by thinkprogress.
Not the best way to phrase the idea he's talking about, but he hardly said she's not a true hero. One could certainly reasonably infer that, though, from what he said. Not great.