Posted on 06/25/2007 9:58:11 AM PDT by pissant
I bet their is more military experience in the Congress, Senate and POTUS candidates than among the press.
Hunter ping.
Yeah but, so what?
No doubt about that.
Yup!
Well, it’s slightly better experience than going to parties with the hollywood libs.
Sorry pissant, but I’m just not buying the “military experience makes someone more virtuous than the rest” argument that you and other Duncanists have been peddling. That stock trades real low in my exchange.
Of course you don’t. I would expect nothing less.
And well you shouldn't. I don't worship the military. I not anti-military, but I'm not pro-military either. The military is there, a necessary evil perhaps that exists because we live in a fallen world, but neither it nor its personnel hold any sort of special place of honour in my book. Hence, a presidential candidate with military experience doesn't get an automatic, unthinking advantage over one who doesn't, AFAIAC.
LOL! It didn’t take the Fredheads long to find this thread, did it?
Never have we needed a man like Duncan Hunter in the White House more than we do now. His “been there, done that” experience is worth beyond buying.
Hey Quinct! You kind of got your tag line bassackwards there, fella.
He is a fisheman, a hunter, a bow -hunter, a hiker, and an avid shooter. Ted Nugent might have to support him.
This was not an anti-Fred thread, just pro Hunter. But they are like mosquitos on a bare butt.
>> The military is there, a necessary evil perhaps that exists because we live in a fallen world, but neither it nor its personnel hold any sort of special place of honour in my book.
Men and women that voluntarily sacrifice the comforts of American civilian life, sacrifice time with their loved ones, and put themselves in a dangerous position for the protection of those freedoms that made this country the “shining city on a hill” deserve a special place of honor in anyone’s book.
Self-sacrifice is an inherent good ... and your failure to recognize that is absolutely inexplicable. At least some appreciation MUST be shown to military personnel and civil servants who shoulder the burden of protecting the rest of us from those evil elements at home and abroad. Their Constitutionally mandated role as defenders of the Republic is certainly “necessary” ... though I am completely flabbergasted that someone could possibly consider the defense of a free people as an “evil”.
That being said, military service rarely makes any difference in my voting (all things being equal ... service is preferred to non-service ... but all things are almost never equal). Military personnel and veterans are just as often wrong about political policy as anyone else ... take Murtha for instance.
H
That ended when Democrat Bill Clinton, who never served in the military, defeated Republican President George H.W. Bush, a decorated World War II veteran. Four years later, Clinton defeated Bob Dole, another World War II combat veteran.
Some on this thread say whether or not a candidate is a veteran means nothing. I strongly disagree. It is certainly a prime indicator of their patriotism and courage. Anomalies like John Kerry aside.
In WW2, El Alamein was the ETO turning point, Midway the turning point in the PTO. Taking the long view of American history, Clinton marks the turning point. And it has been downhill ever since.
One of the reasons I am for Duncan Hunter. As a former Army Ranger, a genuine American hero with courage. We need him to reverse the non-veteran trend that has developed since Clinton.
“Of course you don’t. I would expect nothing less.
And well you shouldn’t. I don’t worship the military. I not anti-military, but I’m not pro-military either. The military is there, a necessary evil perhaps that exists because we live in a fallen world, but neither it nor its personnel hold any sort of special place of honour in my book. Hence, a presidential candidate with military experience doesn’t get an automatic, unthinking advantage over one who doesn’t, AFAIAC.”
PS Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus is dumb.
Yeah, he's "been there, done that" in the House for 21 years. How come Duncan's never had the nerve to put himself up for a statewide before? Would he rather bring home bacon to his home district to ensure an easy re-election, all the while voting for massive spending boondoggles like the prescription drug benefit plan?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.