There are a great many reasons to dislike Romney but the fact he's never served in the military

[Demonaut]

Last edited Thu Jan 26, 2012, 06:19 PM - Edit history (1)

nor have any of his able bodied children and his effective tax rate is at best 13.9%
and his tax haven in the Caymans plus his history of dismantling US companies
makes him the most disgusting and hypocritical candidate I've ever seen.
His support of this country is only what it can give him not what he can do for it

Fuck Mittens

[PearliePoo2]

1. Have ANY of the Romneys ever served?

Didn't Mittens escape the draft and Vietnam by going on a "mission" to Paris?
Is he a chicken-hawk/chicken-shit?

[Demonaut]

5. worse, he actively supported the Vietnam War draft while getting a deferral for his mission

here's the article and pic

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2083002/Mitt-Romney-19-demonstrated-favour-Vietnam-War-draft.html

on edit, he makes me want to puke

[Retrograde]

2. No, a lot of the young men I knew at the time were trying to avoid Vietnam

None of them, though, advocated that others should go in their places. And FWIW, Obama did not serve either.

And don't forget Romney's sons served their country by working on Mitt's 2008 campaign!

[bowens43]

3. never mind....

[Swede]

4. There was picture posted here,of Mitt protesting the Viet Nam protestors.

All the while he was exempted from the draft.

[Wwagsthedog]

6. When did Obama serve?

[aquart]

9. When did Obama support and advocate these wars?

[RZM]

11. Obama has supported and advocated the Afghan war

Though I don't think that makes him a hypocrite either.

[Liberal_in_LA]

10. he didn't but he also didn't advocate for others to go

[Demonaut]

14. read the WHOLE post, it's more than just the serving bit..nt

[trumad]

7. I hate chickenhawks...

[Ron Obvious]

13. But he protested the war in Vietnam

It's the hypocrisy most of us object to, I suspect. Other than Rumsfeld serving in the navy between wars, virtually all the advocates for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars did not serve themselves. The difference was striking.

[Demonaut]

15. youre right, nor did Obama and some would argue W's full commitment

[RZM]

12. I'm not sure that actually matters that much

I don't think personal military service (or lack thereof) needs to be brought up every time a candidate (or president) says or does something regarding military policy, including sending troops into combat. The president is the CIC whether or not he or she has a military background, plain and simple.

While candidates who have served in the military or in combat can perhaps bring valuable perspective to CIC duties, voters actually often prefer their civilian opponent. McCain, Kerry, Dole, and George H.W. Bush all had combat experience and all lost their presidential elections to opponents with either less distinguished military records or no record of military service at all.

It looks like whoever wins the Republican nomination, neither candidate will have any military record. I don't think that's been the case for quite a long time. You'd have to go back quite a while to find another election with no military records at the top of either ticket.

[Demonaut]

16. did you read the entire post?...it's more than his lack of service, it's lack of commitment to the

Country other than what the US can do for him and his family