Mitt: My military-age sons serve America by trying to get me elected; Update: Audio added
posted at 3:03 pm on August 8, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
Oof. Either this came out wrong or he was caught surprisingly flat-footed by the question; as stated, it sounds awful. For the record, the answer to this question always is, “Not everyone was born with the courage and commitment to service displayed by the many thousands of left-wing bloggers who enlisted to fight in Afghanistan after 9/11.”
Incidentally, with Rudy and McCain sitting out the Ames straw poll, the only potentially serious competition for Mitt is … Ron Paul, who’s buying ads to try to make a game of it. Exit question: Do Paul’s left-leaning libertarian supporters know he’s not quite as left-leaning libertarian as they think he is?
Update: The Romney camp has posted the audio of the question and answer.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »
My question: “Mrs. Clinton, do you support a monogamous marriage eventhough your husband does not?”
SouthernGent on August 8, 2007 at 8:41 PM
She would love you for it, because she’d handle that so easily and the unfairness of the question would raise her poll numbers, certainly among women.
She’d say:
And such goes the election.
Christoph on August 8, 2007 at 9:00 PM
Ho-hum, move along kiddies, no train wreck here.
paulsur on August 8, 2007 at 9:01 PM
If we would all stick to issues instead of attacking fellow HA members, the issues could be discussed.
As far as I am concerned, fred? is a lying fake, who is more and actor and an arm-twisting lobbyist than he is a public servant.
Rudy and Mitt! are clearly the class of the rep field, with Huckabee and Hunter very acceptable candidates. The rest, especially fred? have no business cluttering up the conversation as they have zero qualifications and have no plan for the future.
csdeven on August 8, 2007 at 9:12 PM
I think it’s AP’s job to create an atmosphere that will create internet traffic for HA. We need to be examining all the candidates and take them to task for their weaknesses. AP’s does put up threads that skewer fred?, but the difference is that those accusations are always right, while the accusations about Mitt! are always erroneous.
You’re right about the order of events in all Mitt! threads. That’s why they don’t get as many comments as the fred? threads. That and any criticism of fred? and the groupies unleash a stream of vile insults and accusations towards fred? protagonists because they can’t separate themselves from fred?. In the Mitt! threads, the Mitt! supporters usually just debate the issues and don’t assume that any criticism of Mitt! is somehow a personal affront to them personally.
csdeven on August 8, 2007 at 9:22 PM
Thanks for the revealed word from God, csdeven.
You’ve said it and I see it’s true now. Prior to this, I thought we could discuss their strengths and weaknesses, but now I see it, Rudy and Mitt(!) are clearly classy all around. No flaws there.
Fred? He’s a scoundrel. Thanks for clarifying that he has no plans. Why I’m shocked he even started a Presidential campaign or his website or fund raising ’cause clearly, he can’t see two days into the future.
I’m sure he sits there all morning after waking up going,
Christoph on August 8, 2007 at 9:25 PM
Romney triplet babes diss Obama girl!!
Here’s a cool article about Mitt!.
Here
csdeven on August 8, 2007 at 9:30 PM
Here’s a better link to the Romney triplets!
csdeven on August 8, 2007 at 9:32 PM
Actually here is the link to the article about Mitt! out fund raising the other reps in WA.
csdeven on August 8, 2007 at 9:34 PM
Heh. You might want to recalibrate your scope buddy.
The political calculus is amusing, but this is simple arithmetic: Fred threads than get more comments than Mitt’s on HA because there is more buzz, more enthusiasm for Fred than Mitt among HA readers.
Spirit of 1776 on August 8, 2007 at 9:36 PM
I’m just going by the accusations from the groupies that little old me leaves the lions share of the comments in all fred? threads.
Go figure. ;-)
csdeven on August 8, 2007 at 9:45 PM
Romney: Giuliani’s NYC ‘Sanctuary’ for Illegal Immigrants
MB4 on August 8, 2007 at 9:52 PM
Haha. What an excellent answer.
Spirit of 1776 on August 8, 2007 at 9:58 PM
Rudy Giuliani speech when he was NYC mayor – “”Two days ago I announced that the City of New York has filed suit against the federal government. We are challenging a provision of the recently enacted federal Welfare and Immigration law. This new federal law is part of an anti-immigration movement that can be seen throughout the United States, unfortunately.
Here in New York City we know the value of immigration. New York the greatest city in the world was built by the hands of immigrants and it continues to be built and strengthened by immigrants. New Yorkers know
that any effort to eliminate immigration or unfairly burden immigrants could destroy the very process that is the key to New York and America’s success.
That’s why the City of New York has filed suit in federal court. Our lawsuit contends that the new federal law violates the Tenth Amendment of the United States Constitution by invalidating New York City’s
Executive Order 124. For those who may not know, Executive Order 124″ is New York City’s policy regarding undocumented immigrants. This
order was issued seven years ago by Mayor Ed Koch and then later reissued by Mayor Dinkins and then by me. Executive Order 124 protects undocumented immigrants in New York City from being reported to the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service while they are using City services that are crucial for their health and safety, and critical for the health and safety of the entire city.
Joining me in defense of fair treatment for immigrants is a coalition of well-known individuals and organizations who oppose the anti-immigration forces in Washington and elsewhere.”
Clearly Romney is telling the truth and Giuliani is not.
MB4 on August 8, 2007 at 10:00 PM
It’s an individual decision to serve, and how to serve is too.
Mitt was right to throw it back in their face. It’s the only way that works, nowadays.
But still, I’m for Fred, Rudy, Newt, Mike, Sam, and Duncan before Mitt.
petefrt on August 8, 2007 at 10:02 PM
Blind squirrel commenting. lol
csdeven on August 8, 2007 at 10:06 PM
Here’s Mitts! latest TV ad for Iowa. Dang, he’s looking better as time goes on.
csdeven on August 8, 2007 at 10:21 PM
Well I think he looks hot.
Yet if we’re going by looks alone, Fred’s gonna take it. 6′5″ of pure hunky manliness, aye, csdeven?
Christoph on August 8, 2007 at 10:23 PM
Fred Thompson and Dr. Phil are actually clones, raised from a single stem cell.
MB4 on August 8, 2007 at 10:27 PM
Following that line of logic…
Cindy can’t be a peace mom, as her son enlisted and supported the war.
christophercube on August 8, 2007 at 10:28 PM
Cindy can’t be a peace mom, as her son enlisted and supported the war.
christophercube on August 8, 2007 at 10:28 PM
Cindy Sheehan’s MySpace entry, all you didn’t want to know:
Hi there fellow bloggers. My name is Cindy Sheehan. You can just call me Peace Mom if you want. I was born on July 10, 1957, although people tell me that I don’t look my age.
My heroes are Kim Jong Il, Ramsey Clark, Jimmy Carter,
Mahmoud Ahmadinejadin and Hugo Chavez, in fact I have a big crush on him.
I am very witty and am an expert diplomatic ambassador. I am also a frequent guest at Crawford, TX. Intelligent and multi-talented. Of course. Was there any doubt?
I am in a new relationship and completely in love. His name is Hugo Chavez, maybe you know him? I love attention. I would like to think that I would try almost anything at least once. Naturally, it depends on the situation.
I would like to think that I am open minded, honest, polite, and trustworthy, or at least that I can fool other people into thinking that I am once in a while. And I appreciate the same qualities in others.
Did I mention that I adore my new boyfriend Hugo Chavez? Yes, I LOVE HIM! Because of the long distance involved we have not been able to consummate our relationship yet, but we do have a lot of hot and steamy E-mail sex! I am now divorced and my son whats his name is long gone so I am as free as a bird!
Who I’d like to meet:
…other psyhco bloggers. People who like to peace out. Cool people who live close to Saint Elizabeth’s in Washington D.C., because I understand that is where I will be moved to before long.
MB4 on August 8, 2007 at 10:32 PM
I will despise this woman to my dying days. She’s evil.
God bless her son double the usual amount for being able to devote and, unfortunately, ultimately expending himself for good after being raised by that.
Christoph on August 8, 2007 at 10:37 PM
So basically she diddles herself thinking about a dictator… what a lovely lady.
Christoph on August 8, 2007 at 10:37 PM
Still waiting for Mitt to impress me.
aero on August 8, 2007 at 10:40 PM
aero, just wait ’til he’s God!
Christoph on August 8, 2007 at 10:48 PM
There is no such thing as a left-leaning libertarian. “Left” by definition involves big government, which is exactly what libertarianism is against.
What does exist, and is incarnated in the Ron Paullians, is isolationist libertarianism
Baphomet on August 8, 2007 at 10:56 PM
God, you’re kidding, right?
BKennedy on August 8, 2007 at 11:08 PM
God, you’re kidding, right?
BKennedy on August 8, 2007 at 11:08 PM
Only slightly.
MB4 on August 8, 2007 at 11:15 PM
Faith in humanity… dwindling. Urge to remind President of Article III, specifically regarding Treason… rising.
BKennedy on August 8, 2007 at 11:31 PM
My philosophy is that the bigger they are, the harder they fall. Fred is currently off balance. I’ll leave you to discern the rest.
BKennedy on August 8, 2007 at 11:52 PM
Faith in humanity… dwindling. Urge to remind President of Article III, specifically regarding Treason… rising.
BKennedy on August 8, 2007 at 11:31 PM
There is no such thing as treason, or being held
accountable for it anyway, in America anymore.
Not since Jane Fonda sat on that North Vietnamese gun.
MB4 on August 8, 2007 at 11:56 PM
Its an individual decision to serve.
I am not a fan of standing armies and prefer the original model of armed citizens, dare I say, the militia model. A model where everyone was required to participate in the defense of their country.
I disagree with the individual decision to serve model. Frankly, it’s the “I don’t deserve to die because I have so much more to offer the country” line of crap. Cowards and artistocrats talk like that.
They ought to bring the draft back tomorrow.
AZ_Redneck on August 8, 2007 at 11:59 PM
Draft’s a bad idea IMHO. There are lots of ways to serve your country and many can’t serve in the military for medical reasons. I put in 8 years in the reserves (infantry/artillery) but that’s just one of many things that one can do for one’s country. We like presidents with military backgrounds because they’re going to be the commander in chief. It’s better if they have personal experience with the military culture than if they don’t. One of Clinton’s (many) problems was that he was a draft dodger and didn’t have clue one on how to use the magnificent military that we have.
Mojave Mark on August 9, 2007 at 12:12 AM
1) name and enumerate those ways to serve your country
2) people with valid medical problems/issues have not been required to server in the past.
AZ_Redneck on August 9, 2007 at 12:27 AM
It is an individual decision to serve.
My Grandfather served in WWII, my Father in Korea.
My Father suggested I join, but never pressured me.
28 years later I still serve, by my choice.
It wil be my son’s decision.
Sven on August 9, 2007 at 1:09 AM
I agree somewhat, take a look at what form of government the Thais have. Active duty military holding legislative positions, drawing two paychecks, two pensions, and passing laws that benefit them, their families, and cohorts.
But I do support the concept of manatory national service for every U.S. citizen between the ages 18 and 21. Get the kids out of the house, and give them some life experience to go with that voting right. If the kid drops out of school before 18, then he/she is required to start the national service the day after leaving school. No exceptions. National service can mean military, menial jobs in the forestry service, road crews, etc.
Texas Nick 77 on August 9, 2007 at 1:11 AM
Mitt has to prove himself as being honest. Right now his flip flop on abortion, and his lies about being the big hunter, his giving into Democrats (oh yeah you call it reaching out), shows he is all show, no go.
Oh yeah, then there is this:
How convienient, while his peers were fighting a war he was in France.
So if elected president and we go off to war, he goes off to France?
What’s worse, running off to France to keep from the military…or being Gov. of Mass. and end up in bed with Ted Kennedy.
right2bright on August 9, 2007 at 1:49 AM
How convienient, while his peers were fighting a war he was in France.
I don’t want Mitt to be the nominee and will likely skip the general election if he is, but that’s a bit unfair.
A legitimate point, however, is that the media will crucify him on it. Well, that and the flip-flopping pandering slicksterism.
Hollowpoint on August 9, 2007 at 1:55 AM
“If sense was really common, we’d see more of it.”
- Mark Twain
Texas Nick 77 on August 9, 2007 at 1:56 AM
Why do you want to train a nation of free entrepreneurs who have built a country, and a military, the likes of which the world has never seen to do three years menial work for big government?
Christoph on August 9, 2007 at 2:04 AM
Anyone who characterizes this as anything less than a gaff on Mitt’s part has let their fanaticism to overtake their sense of reality.
His sons are serving the country by campaigning for their dad??? Huh??? Well, at least Romney has 100% of the “offspring of Romney” demographic. Way to kind of, sort of compare military service in wartime to working on Daddy’s campaign. Like Bush, Mitt- in addition to being a Big Government Conservative- would be nowhere without Daddy; after Mitt (like his father) loses the nomination, I suppose we’ll be subjected to yet another Romney making a futile run for the nomination in another 16 years.
At best Mitt has maybe a 1/4 chance of winning the nomination, and a 2/5 chance of winning the general. Only the influx of cash from his own pocket has kept him anywere even close to being first tier (and it’s a stretch to say he is).
Sorry BKennedy, Jack Straw, troll, and the other FlipFlop Mitt attack-dog cultists, but there simply aren’t enough fanatical Massachussets residents, Forbes readers and Mormons in the country to get him elected.
Hollowpoint on August 9, 2007 at 2:13 AM
From Time Magazine
1994 Boston Hearald Story:
Oops, caught in another lie…about his service to his country.
right2bright on August 9, 2007 at 2:13 AM
As the Vietnam War raged in the 1960s, Mitt Romney received a deferment from the draft as a Mormon “minister of religion” for the duration of his missionary work in France, which lasted two and a half years.
right2bright on August 9, 2007 at 1:49 AM
I think that Rudy has Mitt topped. Of course neither of them holds a candle to Ted Nugent.
“During his years as an undergraduate at Manhattan College and then at New York University Law School, Giuliani qualified for a student deferment. Upon graduation from law school in 1968, he lost that temporary deferment and his draft status reverted to 1-A, the designation awarded to those most qualified for induction into the Army.
At the same time, Giuliani won a clerkship with federal Judge Lloyd McMahon in the fabled Southern District of New York, where he would become the United States attorney. He quickly applied for another deferment based on his judicial clerkship. This time the Selective Service System denied his claim.
Giuliani prevailed upon his boss to write to the draft board, asking them to grant him a fresh deferment and reclassification as an “essential” civilian employee. As the great tabloid columnist Jimmy Breslin noted 20 years later, during the former prosecutor’s first campaign for mayor: “Giuliani did not attend the war in Vietnam because federal Judge Lloyd MacMahon [sic] wrote a letter to the draft board in 1969 and got him out. Giuliani was a law clerk for MacMahon, who at the time was hearing Selective Service cases. MacMahon’s letter to Giuliani’s draft board stated that Giuliani was so necessary as a law clerk that he could not be allowed to get shot at in Vietnam.”
MB4 on August 9, 2007 at 2:14 AM
I understand the sentiment, and perhaps the country would be better off if we did. However, drafting those who don’t want to serve would weaken the military and I’d rather not see that. The Pentagon is opposed to the draft, and for good reason.
Hollowpoint on August 9, 2007 at 2:17 AM
Neither one very honorable. Neither one represents our country very well. Not exactly a John Kerry…but all three flip flop about as much.
right2bright on August 9, 2007 at 2:20 AM
The Pentagon is opposed to the draft, and for good reason.
Hollowpoint on August 9, 2007 at 2:17 AM
As someone who served with a lot of enlistees and a lot of draftees, I never saw much difference overall. It varied much more by the individual than by if the person enlisted or was drafted.
MB4 on August 9, 2007 at 2:25 AM
I’m still waiting for any of these guys to impress me. And so far I am the least impressed by the RINO’s in this race. Mitt and Rudy.
conservnut on August 9, 2007 at 2:27 AM
right2bright, just my opinion but I think that Mitt’s deferment was more legitimate than Rudy’s or less illegitimate if you want to look at it that way.
MB4 on August 9, 2007 at 2:27 AM
That’s a pretty damn broad definition of lie. Nevermind Time and The Boston Herald aren’t exactly known for their fair and balanced credentials.
So let me get this straight, it is a lie for a 60 year old man to say he respects and honors whatever decisions his children make and that it is their decisions, while when he was fresh out of college he was struggling between his religion, the military, and his wife and child.
What then, right2bright, would make Romney not a liar to you? I don’t see any false statements here. Just a (then) young man struggling with the next big decision in his life. If its a “lie” to make a hard decision like that, I want a liar.
Or are you one of those bigoted jackasses who think a deferment for Mormonism wouldn’t be as noble as a deferment for say, an Evangelical ministry? That its the evil sin of Draft Dodging and Romney’s justification is just a cover for cowardice?
I always wonder why we bring up Vietnam and dodging compulsory service when now we laud our all volunteer army. We’re as stupid as the left is if we’ve been reduced to thinking the ONLY way you can serve your contry and be a true patriot is to be forced into military service. Wern’t the lefties the one’s burning their draft cards, btw? Mitt had his card, his number wasn’t drawn. Why do we let the left get away with calling everyone a draft dodger when they all burned their cards and committed felonies to destroy service records, all in the name of “Peace.”
As to Hollowpoint, I’m assuming you just tl;dr’d (too long; didn’t read) this to go on your rant. How is good old Fred doing, is he taking you to the truck rental place tomorrow? How much of your support money has he sent to his son? Is he going to call up his buddy George Clooney and hold a party? You’ve already told us “lying lobbyist actor or bust, I mean, Hillary,” so why bother with you? Our staying home really showed the demos and all those RINOs last time, didn’t it? Go ahead, stay home. I’ll personally thank you for President Hillary, every day I see you on HA. “Thanks for staying home Hollowpoint, I for one welcome out new socialist overlords!”
BKennedy on August 9, 2007 at 2:31 AM
I respect that, but you’re talking about a much different time. Now we have the “Me Generation” and a military that focuses less on sheer numbers and more on a smaller number of highly trained and often well educated soldiers. I say that with all respect to those who served in Vietnam, but the military has changed quite a lot since those days.
My only experience with the military is 10 years in the Army Reserves (my unit wasn’t called up for Desert Storm), but in Basic I did serve with a couple people of the “join the Army or go to jail” persuasion, and I think our military is better off with volunteers rather than those who serve under duress.
Hollowpoint on August 9, 2007 at 2:34 AM
I agree with hollowpoint, I have been in for 28 years and we have volunteers who are great Americans, I don’t know if it would be the same with a draft.
Sven on August 9, 2007 at 2:40 AM
Perhaps give them opportunities to learn the value of hard work and discipline? Maybe give them a paycheck for doing something to clean up parks, fill in potholes, or defend the country? Something to do instead of wasting time listening to rap “music” and doing dope? Not all 18 to 21 year olds are creating new devices that make them multimillionaires overnight. As for this delaying some from entering college for three years, after three years of common labor, they may appreciate college life a little more and make more use of the opportunity.
Texas Nick 77 on August 9, 2007 at 2:47 AM
I agree with hollowpoint, I have been in for 28 years and we have volunteers who are great Americans, I don’t know if it would be the same with a draft.
Sven on August 9, 2007 at 2:40 AM
You have never served with draftees then. You may have served with some who were drafted but they would have had to have become enlistees by 28 years ago to have still been in even then.
I served with both (1968 to 1972). Overall enlistees were not better. In fact if you twisted my arm and made me say, if I had to say, which were better, I would say overall draftees.
That may well be different now though if a draft were reinstated. In fact I suspect that it would be.
MB4 on August 9, 2007 at 2:48 AM
Hollowpoint on August 9, 2007 at 2:34 AM
Now, in 2007, I think I would mostly agree with you.
MB4 on August 9, 2007 at 2:54 AM
Sounds like socialism.
As Maggie Thatcher said, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”
Your army works. Leave well enough alone. Listen to Sven.
Christoph on August 9, 2007 at 3:05 AM
Yeah, and that whole “I’ll vote for whatever Big Government RINO the Republicans nominate” sure as worked well too, hasn’t it? If the Republicans continue down the RINO path by nominating FlipFlop Mitt or RINO Rudy instead of a conservative, then I won’t vote Republican.
And again- a Mitt Romney supporter calling anyone a liar is really beyond the pale.
Lie: “I’ve been a hunter pretty much all my life”
Truth: Actually only a couple hunting trips in his life.
Lie: “I own a gun of my own”.
Truth: He later was forced to admit he didn’t. Must be tough to feed his lifelong hunting hobby without a gun.
Lie: Had an “epiphany” about abortion researching stem cell research in 2004.
Truth: In 2004, was quoted “I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country,… I believe that since Roe v. Wade has been the law for 20 years, we should sustain and support it.” Futhermore, he remains on both sides of the stem cell debate.
Fred’s “lie”? Claimed to be pro-life, was endorsed by pro-life groups, voted pro-life. Yeah, you’ve really got the dirt on him there!
Hollowpoint on August 9, 2007 at 3:08 AM
Bonnie Tyler said it well:
Where have all the good men gone
And where are all the gods?
Where’s the streetwise Hercules
To fight the rising odds?
Isn’t there a white knight upon a fiery steed?
Late at night I toss and turn and dream
of what I need
I need a hero
I’m holding out for a hero ’til the end of the night
He’s gotta be strong
And he’s gotta be fast
And he’s gotta be fresh from the fight
I need a hero
I’m holding out for a hero ’til the morning light
He’s gotta be sure
And it’s gotta be soon
And he’s gotta be larger than life
Somewhere after midnight
In my wildest fantasy
Somewhere just beyond my reach
There’s someone reaching back for me
Racing on the thunder and rising with the heat
It’s gonna take a superman to sweep me off my feet
I need a hero
I’m holding out for a hero ’til the end of the night
He’s gotta be strong
And he’s gotta be fast
And he’s gotta be fresh from the fight
I need a hero
I’m holding out for a hero ’til the morning light
He’s gotta be sure
And it’s gotta be soon
He’s gotta be larger than life
I need a hero
I’m holding out for a hero ’til the end of the night
He’s gotta be strong
And he’s gotta be fast
And he’s gotta be fresh from the fight
I need a hero
I’m holding out for a hero ’til the morning light
He’s gotta be sure
And it’s gotta be soon
He’s gotta be larger than life
Up where the mountains meet the heavens above
Out where the lightning splits the sea
I would swear that there’s someone somewhere
Watching me
Through the wind and the chill and the rain
And the storm and the flood
I can feel his approach
Like the fire in my blood
I need a hero
I’m holding out for a hero ’til the end of the night
He’s gotta be strong
And he’s gotta be fast
And he’s gotta be fresh from the fight
I need a hero
I’m holding out for a hero ’til the morning light
MB4 on August 9, 2007 at 3:15 AM
How quaint Hollowpoint.
You know, you’d think if any of that stuff actually happened, HA would have graciously posted a link to it, at least vis-a-vis the supposed 2004 abortion statement.
Speaking of Big Government RINOs, hasn’t Fred mostly hired Big Government Washington Insiders to run his campaign? You’re desperately trying to make the Big Government label stick to Romney. Let me guess, next you’ll pull our Romney’s supposed “Universal Health Care” plan, and conveniently forget it was signed off by The Heritage Foundation, a well known lover of Big Government RINO types. (/sarc)
Look Hollowpoint, nothing can change the fact Fred used his PAC as a money funnel for his son’s consulting company. Nothing can change the fact he was an ammoral lobbyist and an amoral Hollyweird sycophant, whose undistinguished Senate record could be replicated by a robot. Nothing can change the fact that he will be torn down and broken apart by the Clinton machine so soon as he gets the nomination. That Fredheads think every hit piece is an indication of fear is ridiculous. The media doesn’t fear Fred, they’re mocking him. They know he’s a bold man of inaction so he makes an easy target. If you want to put your faith in a man who spent his life appeasing whoever brought the money, be my guest. As for me, I’m going for the guy who has a tangible executive experience in a state where he did not need to be conservative for any reason, but was anyway, because thats where he stood.
As to Romney’s hunting comments? An extremely stupid move. I don’t really care though, because I don’t care about the lifelong hunter vote. If you base your vote on whether your President went out into the woods with a high powered rifle and felled a wild, outclassed, outgunned, unsuspecting beast on a regular basis, then more power to you. Hoo-freaking Rah Rambo. The move was idiotic pandering and nothing more, and he hasn’t made the same statement since. It was a stupid move, but pissing off rabid NRA types won’t cost you an election. You want a pro-hunting candidate, vote Tancredo or, amusingly enough, Hunter.
I’m not quiting Mitt just because of the stupid “piss off the hunters” gaffe. Rudy has more problems with the hunting crowd, and the only thing Fred has hunted and killed is his sense of moral principle. What gets me isn’t the 3.3 hours of lobbying (I couldn’t care less), its the funnelling to his Son’s consulting firm. If you’re a damned crony-lover before you get in office, I don’t even want you in a 20 mile radius of Washington DC [unless you're submerged in the Atlantic Ocean], nevermind as President. That is unforgivable. It’s outside the realm of rhetoric and shoots straight to moral character. Divorces can be one-sided affairs, but funneling cash to your son’s firm for no reason? There’s no excuse for that. That’s the kind of crap I expect from the Clintons, not from Fred “I served on a committee,” “I want to do things only a President can do,” “I’ve spent my entire political life as an amoral, ethically challenged wastrel” Thompson.
Fred rode into HotAir with an exclamation point after his name that he didn’t deserve, and he should ride out strapped to a train with a one-way ticket that he deserves totally, at least if I had my way.
BKennedy on August 9, 2007 at 4:19 AM
Maybe, since it was proposed by that bastion of socialism, Dwight D. Eisenhower. Just something to think about.
From the above link, this quote is found abot 3/4 down the page:
“Mandatory full-time service on a national scale has been proposed many times, and was backed by, for example, Dwight D. Eisenhower.”
Texas Nick 77 on August 9, 2007 at 5:49 AM
Hmm… first time I tried to do a link. Since that didn’t work, here is the URL:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conscription_in_the_United_States
Texas Nick 77 on August 9, 2007 at 5:50 AM
POSSIBLY a selective service if required… but not drafting everyone to “teach” them.
Christoph on August 9, 2007 at 7:32 AM
Good lord . . . what solar system do these politicos come from,.
rplat on August 9, 2007 at 9:01 AM
Obvioulsy you will argue any point not to make Romney stand for his statements.
I printed it in black and white, exactly what he said. He was dodging the draft. Lots of young men did, he spent the years in France, a lot of men would have liked to have done the same.
When I came up with a Mitt lie (actually several) this is what you resort too? I am a bigot because I see a man weasling out of service?
But if you want to talk about bigots. How about him forcing Priests to give women abortion pills (a law he helped pass), then saying he never interferred with Catholics. Want the sources on that, they are state law…or will you say the state leg. is not responsible for reporting the truth?
And good try on no wanting to review Viet Nam. If you want to bring up his voting record, bring up his whole record. He is running for President, not the PTA.
Oh, and his kids quit their jobs and are now living on welfare? Or are they on the payroll like you deride other candidates who pay their childrens way.
Let’s summarize: He lied about his dodging the draft…he lied about being the big bad hunter…he lied about abortion…he lied about stem cell…his kids have quit their jobs, where is their income?…he has been in bed with Ted Kennedy for the past several years…he sat and watched the biggest boondoggle in Mass history, the “big dig” in Boston, suck the money out of the treasury…but he doesn’t drive a red pick up, so Fred is much worse.
Yeah, I can see why you support this guy. Because I am a bigoted jackass, that makes you the great debater, can’t argue your intellect…you little Einstein.
right2bright on August 9, 2007 at 9:01 AM
I would agree, if Mitt agreed. At one point he said he did not want to serve, so he found a way…going to France to serve out his “deferment”. Another rich kid (remember who his father was) dodging the draft.
right2bright on August 9, 2007 at 9:07 AM
There are a lot of ideas that sound like socialism, but stop short of it. We don’t live in our own personal vacuums. Each of us have a responsibility to our different communities. Those communities being: Family, work, neighborhood, city, state, nation, and world. Fulfilling that responsibility is defined as serving those communities up to the point where socialism takes over. We require children to attend school for the good of those communities. We could require a national service of sorts for the same reason. I don’t know how that would flesh out, but I am confident that it could be done without getting on the slippery slope to socialism.
csdeven on August 9, 2007 at 9:19 AM
Hollowpoint is a single issue voter. (2nd amendment) So keep that in mind when discussing a candidate that doesn’t toe the NRA line. Most 2nd amendment folks ARE NOT single issue voters, so any weakness that Mitt! has when it comes to the NRA’s agenda, he more than makes up for in executive experience and his general conservatism.
He holds to a lot of standards that are attractive to regular Americans. And if the single issue 2nd amendment voters want to stay home, that’s OK. Mitts! family values etc will draw people to vote who would stay home because a lying faking arm-twisting lobbyist who funnels his PAC money to his son might be the nominee.
csdeven on August 9, 2007 at 9:26 AM
Last time I checked, U.S. Military service is voluntary.
Point is that in mocking those who choose not to serve, we belittle the service of those who do volunteer.
I could give a rat’s behind about anyone not serving. There are many ways to serve this nation other than the military. But don’t belittle those who do serve in the military on our collective behalf.
On the other hand, if Mitt really is a draft dodger as claimed, then that is a personal issue we take up with him. But in the process of addressing Mitt’s specific situation, it is unfair to use this as a platform to deride those currently serving. Which is exactly what the leftists and many centrists are doing… so let’s not get sucked into this same black hole of illogical thinking.
Lawrence on August 9, 2007 at 9:29 AM
I completely agree.
Lawrence on August 9, 2007 at 9:32 AM
You can read those quotes any way you like, but the reason why it is not, and will not get any traction is because it is entirely more likely that the first quote describes his attitude before he made the decision and the second quote is a description of his feelings afterward. I realize that the two quotes are not in chronological order, but we clearly do not have to recount our experiences in chronological order as we live our lives.
His missionary days were AFTER the quote where he was “considering” what to do. So, you can take that any way you like, but a rational person can clearly see that Mitt! was being entirely accurate about two different stages in his life. One as he was making a life changing decision, and the other AFTER he had made the decision.
And BTW, MOST LDS men do serve missions regardless of any wars this country may be involved in. If your assertion that he only did it to avoid service was true, the rate of LDS men going on their missions would be dramatically lessened during peace time. And if you think that, well, you just are not interested in the facts.
csdeven on August 9, 2007 at 9:40 AM
This early election campaign is starting to wear me down. I agree with the Newt who recently said
“These aren’t debates. This is a cross between ‘The Bachelor,’ ‘American Idol’ and ‘Who’s Smarter than a Fifth-Grader.”
Mitt may have just lost on the later.
Ernest on August 9, 2007 at 9:53 AM
Regarding the military service of the candidates themselves (not their children or anyone else), NOT ONE of the top-tier candidates on either side has served in the military in any capacity(assuming McCain is not counted as top-tier anymore). Please correct me if I’m wrong.
In other words, our Commander in Chief next time around is NOT going to be a person with any kind of military experience at all. During a time of war. Yikes.
aero on August 9, 2007 at 10:03 AM
Your ignorance of the expectations for all LDS males to serve missions doesn’t prove your accusation that he dodged the draft. He never burned his draft card and was willing to serve if called, but would rather be with his family. The draft board gave him the deferment for his church service, but that was gone after his two year mission. He just so happened to have a high draft number.
Yeah, he did and it was stupid.
That is your opinion. He has explained that he has had a change of heart. That is not lying, unless you are in his head and can read his mind. Lying is what fred? has done. CLAIMED he has ALWAYS been pro-life when he, both in print and on a questionair, insisted he was pro-choice. Now, if freddie bot would come clean (HA! fat chance!) and admit he has had a change of mind, then he might get some cover. But he has already lied about it so that will have to be dealt with. Perhaps he could just admit he was trying to fake out his supporters, and he’s sorry?
I haven’t seen this accusation yet.
I’m sure they have. And if they are working for their dad, why shouldn’t they get paid? At least he isn’t funneling money from his own PAC to pay his son for a do nothing job where very little was accomplished towards the stated goals of the PAC. We can see that Mitts! kids are working their butts off doing EXACTLY what the campaign stated goals are.
First I’ve heard of this too.
Yeah, you’ll have to provide proof of this also. Considering he inherited the project, I’m sure there is more to the story.
csdeven on August 9, 2007 at 10:03 AM
It is expected in LDS families that all males serve a two years mission for the church regardless of wars etc. Mitt! NEVER hid from the draft after his mission. He just happened to have a very high draft number. This isn’t a story with any credibility. It is only fodder for those who are ignorant of LDS beliefs.
csdeven on August 9, 2007 at 10:08 AM
Oooh, looks like a touched a nerve. Nice dodging, duder. I get the feeling that Mitt could be caught on camera in front of 10,000 witnesses snorting coke of a dead hooker while engaging in human sacrifice, but you’d still rant “no he didn’t! It doesn’t matter! And Fred hired one of his sons!”
Fred hires one of his sons, paying him an average of $56,000/yr with PAC money that was left over from his Senate campaign after he left the Senate: unforgiveable. Romney hires 5 of his sons, paying them with campaign money: totally acceptable.
Word of advice: given Romney’s silver spoon, politically connected upbringing, I’m not sure you really want to make a big deal about the father helping out his son.
Hollowpoint on August 9, 2007 at 10:37 AM
He should have said:
“We’ll talk about other forms of service once there’s a new Commander-In-Chief. My sons are fighting for that, right now. Next question.”
profitsbeard on August 9, 2007 at 11:38 AM
I’m a Duncan Hunter supporter, but I don’t see anything wrong with Mitt’s response.
Christine on August 9, 2007 at 12:47 PM
Actually it was his son’s consulting firm, while apparently didn’t do any consulting. If Romney is paying his sons for services rendered, that’s fine, but just sending leftover money afterward for no reason like Fred did is nothing more than cronyism. Why support conservative causes when your grown-up son needs a new hot rod? Why take action to help the people and causes who elected you when you could cut a big fat check to your family?
Oh, and right2bright, the question about bigotry was solely about the deferment for religion, and nothing else. It was also in the form of the question itself, and it came directly after another question that asked where the lie was.
Oh, and I don’t think I’ll find Mitt doing any such snorting with crackwhores Hollowpoint. It’s against his religion, for one thing. Now Fred… well, he wouldn’t do it, but he’d probably lobby for them at the right price.
BKennedy on August 9, 2007 at 1:50 PM
It’s funny- mention Romney’s religion even in passing, you’re a biggot… unless you’re one his his supporters and/or fellow Mormons. What’s his religion say about abortion? Before his Presidential abmitions in mid-2005 came to light, he seemed to be all for it.
Hollowpoint on August 9, 2007 at 2:09 PM
Read my posts, those are quotes from him. He is lying, and we know how you feel about those guys.
His big wealthy father, like many others of wealth and power, got his son in France to dodge the draft.
right2bright on August 9, 2007 at 2:39 PM
Okay (before I spend my time), if I answer each of those questions and objections with statements or actions from him then you will turn your back on this dishonest liar?
Or will you just accept him, faults and all?
The problem Mitt has now, is his powerful dad can’t send him to France to dodge his responsibilities.
right2bright on August 9, 2007 at 2:43 PM
No, mentioning Romney’s religion doesn’t make you a bigot. Pretending Mormonism isn’t a pure enough religion to go on a mission for, thus deferring the draft, does. Maybe that position is too nuanced, and therefore suspect, in the eyes of Hollowpoint.
That’s right! Romney had absolutely no say in the matter of his own religious mission, which would have separated him from his wife and child.
But hey, Romney was living it up on a religious mission in France and THAT’S EVIL! How dare religion get in the way of compulsory service! Romney’s a draft dodger! EVIL EVIL EVIL! We’ll have no tolerance for draft dodgers here at HA. We’re just a proxy of the left! We’re here to weed out the evil draft dodgers and totally ignore our own candidate’s lack of military service! Are we going to laud the draft card burners and record destroyers now for “patriotism?” Pathetic.
BKennedy on August 9, 2007 at 2:48 PM
No I don’t think that. LDS young men serve their purpose with a youthful exuberance, many youths in many societies are used that way. This was just a convienient “out” for Mitt, serving his mission in France during war is a great deal for him. His father was a powerful man, and I understand wanting to protect him. I am glad he worked it out, if he did not want to serve his country he should not have to. The military service during war is for the brave and courgeous The true patriots place their personal life on hold and fight for yours and mine freedom. I would never want those men to be burdened with a person who does not believe in serving.
I would think the military would be a great place to do missionary work. Christ always went to the places that needed him. Mitt, and the LDS, felt they were better served in France. Believe me, I know several widows that would have loved to have had their husbands on a mission in France. Mitt’s a lucky man, to have not served, to have lived in France, to have such a powerful father. I can see the similiarites between Kennedy, Reagan, and Mitt…besides the service to the country.
right2bright on August 9, 2007 at 2:55 PM
Ok, I read that as sarcastic, and my curiosity is struck. Are you saying they do have choice in location of missionary work? I was under the impression they do not. In fact, so said one missionary to me.
Spirit of 1776 on August 9, 2007 at 2:56 PM
Let me see if my accouning is correct.
Fred used PAC money to pay his sons. That is bad.
Mitt uses campaign contributions for campaigning. But pays his sons out of his own pocket…because contributions subsidizes his other expenses. So money goes in his left pocket, and pays his sons out of his right pocket. That is good.
So Fred is bad, Mitt is good. I get it. If Fred had deeper and more pockets he would be good.
right2bright on August 9, 2007 at 3:07 PM
I don’t pretend to know anything about the Mormon faith or their mission process. I just don’t like the insinuations I see here that Mitt is somehow morally lacking because he went on a mission for his faith instead of compulsory military service, as if either option was what he would have preferred over spending time with his wife and child. All some HA users seem to care about is that he was in France while others were in Vietnam, as if he were there on vacation for the sole purpose of evading the draft, and that he left nothing precious behind when he made his very personal, private choice.
BKennedy on August 9, 2007 at 3:11 PM
No, Fred used his PAC money to pay his son’s consulting company for consulting that wasn’t done. It isn’t that he paid his son, its that he did it in a slick, underhanded way that you’d expect from the Clintons.
And I’m getting real tired of this class envy crap as well. I’m not a rich man, my family is as middle class as they come, but I’m not about to start saying “Romney is rich, and that’s bad!”
How did Romney make his money anyway? Oh sure, his Dad wasn’t poor, but Mitt actually made something of himself. Unlike Inheritor Ted, he’s actually had a job, and a tough, time consuming one his entire adult life. The idea that Mitt is a classic trust fund baby just because his dad was rich is completely unwarranted.
BKennedy on August 9, 2007 at 3:19 PM
They do not and no amount of wealth and connection can influence it. And on top of that, the missionary himself pays his own way. I know a missionary who sold his restored 1968 Corvette to finance his mission.
csdeven on August 9, 2007 at 3:37 PM
You still haven’t explained how those two quotes get to a draft dodging accusation.
csdeven on August 9, 2007 at 3:39 PM
You need to stop while you’re ahead. LDS missionary work is wholely different than you are presenting it.
csdeven on August 9, 2007 at 3:41 PM
That’s what I thought, thanks.
Spirit of 1776 on August 9, 2007 at 3:49 PM
Looking further into it, it’s worse than I thought. His decision to go to France (where, you know, there’s a desperate need for missionaries) came after spending only 2 semesters at Stanford. Why would he enroll at Stanford if he was planning on doing missionary work soon thereafter?
Furthermore (likely thanks to his governor Dad), he got student deferrments even after he got back. I don’t like the “chickenhawk” or “draft dodger” argument, but on the face of it, it sure looks like he got special treatment in avoiding the draft thanks to political connections and wealth. Count on the Dems and thier media allies to hammer him and Rudy on this.
Hollowpoint on August 9, 2007 at 4:18 PM
No class envy, it just needs to be said where he comes from. A priviledged home, from a powerful political father. Hardly, from a working class, build your own empire type guy. Kennedy, Bush, Gore, Jackson, the congress is riff from children following in dad’s footsteps. Not envy, just aware that they did not “work” their way up like many others.
right2bright on August 9, 2007 at 4:21 PM
Dude, according to your logic there wouldn’t be any in the US. And uh, there are missionaries in the US. They go all over the world. As far as the school, makes sense. I think they start missionary work at a certain age, so it would make sense to wisely utilize the time up to that, yes?
This is just more of the ‘throw it up against the wall and see what sticks’ arguments that are getting too common these days.
Spirit of 1776 on August 9, 2007 at 4:25 PM
Then we’re making a big deal out of nothing, aren’t we?
;)
My point, not directed to you personally, is in regard to people trying to make hash out of his lack of military service, and lack of service of his sons, in context of our volunteer military.
I do not complain about anti-war nutroots who do not want to serve. I just complain when they mock others who do. But let us collectively not get into that same mocking mind set by mocking those who don’t serve. Let us not stoop to their level.
Lawrence on August 9, 2007 at 4:31 PM
LDS members are not sent on missions if they are married. Mitt would have served his mission unmarried and would have ZERO choice on his assignment. Mitt also, had he not chosen to stay at Stanford, would have been eligible for deferment along with the rest of his class. And just like all LDS missionaries, he was eligible for deferment while on his mission. He was deferred when he came back and went to school. I don’t know, but after his near fatal accident in France, he might not have been physically qualified for military service.
So those of you who claim he dodged the draft by serving a mission are ignorant of the facts. Mitt!, like many people who went to school, were deferred just because they were in school.
Mitt! immediately married Ann in 1969 and they started their family. I doubt the Army would have taken him after he started a family. He finished up school in 1975.
Again, the events in his life have evolved as many in the LDS faith have, and still do. School, one year of college, a two year mission, marriage and family, back to school, and then into a career.
csdeven on August 9, 2007 at 4:32 PM
Threaten someone else. You have already been proved to be a liar.
I know what “missionary” work is, and should be. I also know that there are many places where missionaries go. Inner cities, third world countries, impoverished nations, war torn nations, and France. I also know that it is not by random. It was best he was out of the country, he was safer in France, our ally at the time.
right2bright on August 9, 2007 at 4:33 PM
I am retired from the military. I served with many Mormans and they were excellent soldiers.
There are a group of folks who are against war and against killing. I admire them, they join the service and act as medics, saving lives rather than destroying. This group is the Seventh Day Adventists.
navy1946 on August 9, 2007 at 4:38 PM
Actually….
Again, the events in his life have evolved as many in the LDS faith have, and still do. High school, one year of college, a two year mission, marriage, back to school, start a family (while in school) and then into a career.
The mission usually starts when you are 19 and depending on your birth date etc, you could get a year or less in at college while waiting for your mission call. The mission starts by the person letting the leadership of the church know he wants to serve a mission. After that the process is completely out of the control of the missionary and the family until he receives a letter in the mail letting him know when to report to MTC (missionary training center) and also the area of the world you will serve.
csdeven on August 9, 2007 at 4:39 PM
You know nothing. I tell you what, you provide proof that Mitt! or his family, or any missionary and their family, have any say over the area the missionary serves and you’ll get a bit of credibility back.
You are ignorant of the LDS faith and every time you speak on it you reveal that ignorance.
csdeven on August 9, 2007 at 4:42 PM
Csdeven has so many excuses, like a kid who comes home late at night.
Starting a family did not excuse you from being drafted. Ask my brother, married, with one child a new mortgage. And he was drafted into the Marines.
But he went on a mission to be eliminated from that “pool of young men”. Sounds like an action to me.
As I said, caught in a lie…there is more to his background, including forcing Priests to give abortion pills. That was a good law. And then claiming he never interferred with Catholics. OOPS!!
Want to go to the stem cell? I didn’t think so.
Flip-flop, flip-flop
right2bright on August 9, 2007 at 4:45 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »