Glenn Reynolds @ USA Today:
Last week, I speculated that we may be seeing a “preference cascade,” as people who previously supported Obama now feel safe about publicly changing their minds. It seems that we’re seeing more of that this week as word of the Benghazi debacle spreads. The Obama campaign no doubt hopes you’ll be distracted from this by hurricane news, but that’s probably a vain hope on its part.
On the left, the defections are mounting. Last week, I spoke to Camille Paglia about her new book on art history, but she also stopped to explain why she wasn’t voting for Obama this time: basically, disappointment. She said he ran as a moderate, but has been “one of the most racially divisive and polarizing figures ever. I think it’s going to take years to undo the damage to relationships between the races.”
She was also unhappy with the Libya intervention — which admittedly hasn’t turned out well — and with the ongoing drone attacks, as well as the way ObamaCare turned out. She says she’ll vote for Green Party candidate Jill Stein, whom I interviewed here a while back, instead.
Others on the “progressive” side are coming out, too. In Salon.com, longtime netroots activist Matt Stoller makes “the progressive case against Obama.” Stoller’s case is largely economic. He writes of the new ordering created by the Obama administration’s interventions: “The bailouts and the associated Federal Reserve actions were not primarily shifts of funds to bankers; they were a guarantee that property rights for a certain class of creditors were immune from challenge or market forces.” He’s right, and there are some Chrysler bondholders, and non-UAW pensionholders who can attest to that firsthand.
In The Atlantic, Conor Friedersdorf writes “Why I Refuse To Vote For Barack Obama.” “I’d have thought more people on the left would regard a sustained assault on civil liberties and the ongoing, needless killing of innocent kids as deal-breakers.” Well, lefties complained more under Bush, but some are unhappy.
A.V. Yours is truly a bizarre argument.
Red/birtherteam. You’ve got company here at F.A. A great group indeed
Here’s the problem.Huckabee says I’m going to hell and Redteam tells me BHO was born in Kenya and A.V.tries to say I love abortions.
Exit question Why the hell would I align with that?
You guys may think you’re winning some strange battles but it’s BECAUSE OF YOU Obama is gonna get re-elected.
@Richard Wheeler: What is bizarre? Is there any denying that if someone is aborted they would have never been? Or about how the dems are preoccupied with abortion? My state is on the verge of bankruptcy. The country isn’t that far behind. The U-6 unemployment rate is equal to what the unemployment rate was during the Depression. All I keep hearing from the blue side in their local advertisements is abortion this and abortion that. There are no ideas about how to get our financial house in order or how to spur the economy to create jobs. Look at your own answer to who you consider to be an extremist. The first reason you gave was not supporting Roe vs. Wade. Abortion. Ask a conservative the same question and most likely the response would center on upholding the Constitution and limited government.
Real, live Democrats have been thrown under the bus if they were white males, non-unionized workers, fiscal conservatives (also called Blue Dog Democrats), pro-traditional marriage, and so on.
So, what to do?
Democrats have been trotting out all their over 110-year old voters!
In one state alone already 583 Dems have early voted while being over 112 in age!*
That state apparently has over 2,200 registered voters over 110.*
Those graveyards are RICH in Democrat votes!
No wonder the Democrats are fighting the cleaning up of the registered voter rolls.
*This is odd because the entire USA only has 53,364 people over age 100.
http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-03.pdf
And as of October 30, 2012 there are only 69 persons in the entire WORLD who are 110 or older!
http://www.grg.org/calment.html
Nan You have a vivid imagination lol
The smell of desperation from the Romney camp. They don’t understand why they can’t close the deal.
@Richard Wheeler: yeah, I have to agree, no one should be surprised by all the dead voters. they vote 99% dimocrat. I’m not sure who hauls them all to the polls, but they sure get there regularly. Has anyone noticed that in every single case of voting machines ‘failing’ that they have failed in favor of Obama. I’m sure it must be the Kenyan cabal that is responsible.
@Richard Wheeler:
Don’t count your chickens before they hatch. Nov 6 is going to be a neck to neck race.
Mr Irons Indeed it will be close and decided in Ohio where polls show Obama up a steady 3-5&
Interesting to see Mitt the Mass.moderate abandoning the base and literally begging Indies and Dems. to vote for him.
Truly a sad sight for Conservatives and Tea Party supporters. True Conservatives like Mata were never fooled by him.Others will forgo their Conservative values and vote for him in a desperate yet ultimately Futile attempt to unseat the incumbent
NanG and Redteam Unconfirmed sources are saying Chris Christie and Ann Coulter will endorse Obama. This to offset those dead BHO supporters and the Kenyan Cabal.
Pending on the Polling data groups you go to, Wheeler. Right now even with a weighted advantage towards Obama, Rasmussen has this:
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/election_2012
If you were to go with a 2008 type of slanted polling, Obama does indeed win those states but currently standing from Early Voting results from Ohio are not going to well for Obama with Democrats now trying to motivate and push out their base to vote in the Early process.
And if you have forgotten many of us here, Myself included, did not want Romney as the GOP pick. So I have no bloody idea why you’re going down a path of what supposed “conservatives” want.
Yet in the long run this all depends on who gets out to actually vote, the polls do nothing more than show what the sampling groups are biased towards as a pick to vote for but doesn’t mean they will be out there and actually vote. As I said this is too damn close for either side to make sweeping winning claims yet.
@Richard Wheeler:
Why do you think it odd for Romney to try to gain the Indie and Dem votes? Do you think that only Republicans are out of jobs and losing their homes? Funny, in all the stats I read, I never saw that one.
People of all political stripes are hurting. When an employer has to lay off 20 people, he doesn’t do it based on their voter registration party designation. What should bother you is that Obama even has a remote chance to remain in office considering that his administration has been nothing more than a failure of a Chicago mafia don.
But then, I guess getting free stuff provided to you by the hard work of taxpayers means a lot to someone. Well, what happens when the
SocialistsDemocrats run out of other people’s money? Do we just keep printing dollar bills or keep borrowing from China? How long before we become Wiemar Republic II?I read yesterday that the Obama’s approval rate with blacks is down to 88%. That’s down 10 percentage points. Guess not having a job counts in that segment of our nation, just as it does with other groups. And while I don’t think that 10% is going to vote for Romney, they just aren’t going to vote.
Obama has been Carter on steroids. But hey, he’s a “clean and articulate” black guy, so let’s just vote him back into office although our debt is a disgrace, we have a workforce that is smaller than it was when he took office, the real unemployment rate (U-6) has not dropped below Great Depression rates, Dodd-Frank is preventing small lending banks from helping start Mom and Pop companies that would hire people, Fast and Furious, Benghazi, increased military losses in Afghanistan, thwarting the First and Fourth Amendments, trying to abolisgh the Second Amendment; gee, Rich, what’s not to like with Obama?
So Obama goes on TV and tells you what he is going to do in the next four years. Well, if the last four years is any indication of what he will do in the next four years, you better run, not walk, to your nearest polling station and pull that level for Mitt Romney. Unless you, like Obama, want to turn the U.S. into just another third world nation with no influence.
@Richard Wheeler: Thanks for proving to everyone that contrary to numerous claims you have made, that you are now and always have been in the tank for Obama. As for the polls you reference, how about linking some of them so we can see what the breakdown of their samples were. Rasmussen has Romney up nationwide, amongst swing state voters, in Ohio, in Florida, in Virginia, in Colorado, and in New Hampshire. He uses a D+3 sample.
@Richard Wheeler:
and of course Zero is not asking indies or Dims to vote for him.. right?
@Richard Wheeler:
Truly a sad sight for the defenders of a Zero that would not do all he could to protect American lives in Benghazi. Whether true conservatives are/or are not fooled by him, at least we’re not fooled by Zero.
Indiana Rape Victims (and their Children) Agree with Mourdock’s Abortion Views:
I think (to get back to the topic of Dems leaving Obama) the only reason there are any polls showing Obama in a lead in certain places (not CA, for instance) is that some dishonest pollsters use higher samples of turnout for Dems than they even got in 2008!
Examine, key state by key state, what percentage of the final vote identified themselves as Democrats in 2008, and see how that compares to some recent poll samples……
1. Colorado 2008 exit poll: 30 percent. ARG: 33 percent. Purple Strategies: 34 percent. PPP: 37 percent. NBC/WSJ/Marist: 45 percent
2. Florida 2008 exit poll: 37 percent. Survey USA: 42 percent. PPP: 43 percent.
3. Iowa 2008 exit poll: 34 percent. Gravis Polls: 41 percent. NBC/WSJ/Marist: 45 percent (with leaners, 34 percent without).
4. Michigan 2008 exit poll: 41 percent. EPIC-MRA: 42 percent.
5. Minnesota 2008 exit poll: 40 percent. Survey USA: 45 percent.
6. Nevada 2008 exit poll: 38 percent. Survey USA: 43 percent. NBC/WSJ/Marist: 39 percent. Gravis Polls: 45 percent. PPP: 42 percent.
7. New Hampshire 2008 exit poll: 29 percent. PPP: 30 percent. ARG: 29 percent. University of New Hampshire: 45.6 percent.
8. North Carolina 2008 exit poll: 42 percent. Elon University: 47.9 percent (with leaners, 38 percent without). PPP: 46 percent (10/25) PPP:45 percent (10/31).
9. Ohio 2008 exit poll: 39 percent. PPP: 43 percent.(10/28) PPP:45 percent (10/30) Gravis Polls: 40 percent.
10. Pennsylvania 2008 exit poll: 44 percent. Gravis Polls: 45 percent. Muhlenberg College: 46 percent. PPP: 48 percent.
11. Virginia 2008 exit poll: 39 percent. Gravis Polls: 41 percent.
All of these polls are assisting (or trying to be assisting) Obama’s fallacy of the Band Wagon.
Get on board.
Everybody else is!
When all the polls and the news media get ya down just turn on Fox and break out Ras. to cheer you up.Pretty simple
@Richard Wheeler: Or……take another swig of that Koolaid….
@Richard Wheeler:
Just curious RW, how do you know what’s on Fox News?
@Richard Wheeler: When your candidate has no record to run on and has no vision for the future other than doing what has already failed and is thus resorting to negative personal attacks, a sign of desperation, tune into polls that are based on D+8 to D+12 samples to cheer you up. If they turn out to be right, just think of the mess Obama will inherit this time. As for a Romney win, we’ll have to work on keeping him alive the next four years given all the assassination threats from the Obama supporters.
RedTeam O’Reilly is a great show. Hannity laughable.
A.V. Assassination threats. Another sick comment from you I’m afraid
@Richard Wheeler:Sick? Here’s the evidence. Spin it like you want and deny the reality that it has taken place. I think the sick people are those making the statements and those who deny that they have in fact been made. And you still haven’t elaborated on why making a factual statement that if someone was aborted they would have never been, is sick.
http://www.infowars.com/obama-supporters-continue-threats-to-riot-assassinate-romney/
@Richard Wheeler:
What is it that you do not understand about skewed sample statistics in polls? I’m sure someone would explain it to you if you asked them.
Really, Rich? Are you saying that you don’t believe the threats? Or are you saying that they aren’t assassination threats? The day after the last debate, twitter blew up with people talking about assassinating Romney if he got elected, some even before the election. It’s available to see online, if you do a search. Or, if you follow AV’s link. To talk out of your ass like that, and call AV’s comment “sick”, is just plain stupid, and you aren’t stupid, so why do it? Is it because you cannot comprehend that what conservatives here have been saying is actually true? Does your faith in Obama run that deep?
@johngalt: In addition, the threats have been acknowledged by the Secret Service and are being investigated by the Secret Service. That must make them sick too. Perhaps a nerve was struck about being challenged on the skewed polls. The other “sick” comment he was referring to was the one about how if abortion was legal prior to Obama being born, his mother may have aborted him. Not a far stretch given how much she “cared” about him. I could probably see how someone who is PC could see that as being “sick” but I’m not PC.
Getting back to the skewed polls, this is a pretty good observation on the polling differences. His conclusion is right on the money about someone being way off in their methods.
http://www.nationaljournal.com/columns/on-the-trail/parties-wonder-which-side-s-polls-reflect-reality-20121101
@Richard Wheeler:
Ummm… NO… that is not what Huckabee said.
Anyone with even a smattering of Biblical knowledge would be aware of what he was talking about in the ad.
@Aye: Epithets do not count as reason.
@Liberal1 (Objectivity):
I figured that you lacked the intellect to address the arguments and now I know for sure.
Thanks for playing though.
@Aye: You didn’t point anything out, but asked Greg to point something out. Perhaps you should take class on English clarity.
@Liberal1 (Objectivity):
That’s some funny stuff right there.
Perhaps you should take a closer look at #78.
You will quickly discover that I did indeed point out flaws in, and subsequently destroy, your arguments once again.
Of course, those are inconvenient truths that you don’t wish to address.
Do you lack the self awareness required to understand what is happening to you?
@Aye: Your emotional argument is persuasive. But we were discussing the fetus—which has never known life, which is different to a being who has. For a good period of its existence the fetus can barely be described as sentient. There are very few Alzheimers and brain injured people who do not have self awareness—which is a testable and specific attribute of living things—and these are usually referred to in ‘lay terms’ as brain dead (and eventually taken off life support with the approval of their family). As far as neo-nates are concerned, there is a considerable difference between that case and an embryo—for example, embryos don’t feel pain until a certain age—neo-nates feel pain form the beginning. These considerations are built-in to minimum abortion laws where they are restricted after a certain age of the fetus. As for infanticide of new-borns, in certain cases—physical condition of the infant, for example—I would not be opposed to it.
Now I’m sure many religious oriented people on this site may disagree with my position. But the question is can they muster a rational argument against it.
As for your “inalienable rights” argument, those words are part of an 18th Century outlook of man (and incidentally questionable as concerns women), pre-modern science.
@Liberal1 (Objectivity):
An entertaining, yet futile, attempt to move the goal posts. Good try though.
And there you have it ladies and gentlemen; the sheer depravity of the American left.
@Aye:
There is something wrong when China, of all places, is beginning to deliberate on changing their “one child” policy, while the American left seems to be pursuing the “no child” policy more intently than ever.
In aisle 78, you make reference to me as a “dump-and-run coward” and as “being like six year old girl running away”.
My first question about “being a coward”, I don’t know how old you are, but have you ever served your country in war?
I also don’t know your sex, but regarding your denigration of “six year old girls”, it sounds awfully sexist to me. Don’t six year old boys run away in fear too? Either you’re a man, and sexist, like I said; or you’re a woman who has bought into the religious talk about men being superior to women.
One more thing: Greg generally gives a lot of good statistical information that your readers tend to overlook and, instead, slight his integrity, rather than dealing with the arguments—similar to yourself.
@Liberal1 (Objectivity):
Did I? Hmmmm…. No, I didn’t.
Now, I can accurately refer to you as a liar as well.
Congratulations on that.
@Liberal1 (Objectivity):
No, Greg gives statistical information, but then goes on to apply the liberal/progressive spin on it. In doing so, Greg overlooks the truth of the information he provides, as the numerous and various examples of people turning his own info “sources” back on him can attest.
But at least Greg is useful, in that regard. The most we get out of you is the repeated name “ultra” conservatives, and some blame about how everything bad is their fault.
And oh, how rich that is. You questioning someone else’s military background, while you salivate over the possibility of electing back into office a man who went no where near providing such service to his country.
@johngalt: I realize conservatives like the make up their own connotation of words, but does the following statement of Romney’s really sound like an ’embellishment’ of the truth, or just a plain old error:
“I saw a story today that one of the great manufacturers in this state, Jeep, now owned by the Italians, is thinking of moving all production to China.”
Question: What is the ‘truth’ in this statement that his words are decorating to make more appealing?
@Liberal1 (Objectivity):
Sigh…
Here’s what you claim Romney said:
Here’s what the Bloomberg article said:
Now… where, precisely, is the “embellishment” that you claim to exist? Where, precisely, is the error?
@johngalt: At least Obama didn’t flagrantly avoid the draft.
I don’t mean to defend Greg—he can do that by himself. But people on this site keep calling me on this issue. You’ve got Greg’s comments backward: Instead of ‘spinning’ the statistics to support his view; he supports his view by the use of statistics. But most ultra-conservatives don’t understand this distinction, and give statistics a bad name because they are the ones doing the spinning. I wonder why, if you admit that Greg is useful in some sense, do you and your kind insult him, instead of mounting logical arguments to disprove him.
By the way, why don’t you like being called an ultra-conservative? Or an extreme-conservative? You certainly realize that the views exhibited on this website are not main-stream conservatism, don’t you? I wouldn’t take offense if you called me a ultra- or extreme- liberal.
@Liberal1 (Objectivity):
While you may ‘realize’ that, and also suggest it, that doesn’t make it true. Not in the specific reference you are talking about. Not ever, really. Words have meaning, Lib1, and I used that word, embellish, in the correct connotation it was meant for. That you cannot see it, is no reason to place that failing upon me.
And, of course, you have suggested in the past that conservative use of ‘liar’ and ‘hypocrite’ is wrong as well. Even when you were presented with actual details and definitions showing that their use was, in fact, correct.
I’ll explain it again, for those of you lacking in reading comprehension above the Fourth grade level.
That is the Webster’s definition, Lib1. You can find it online rather easily.
Romney’s relevant statement;
In order for something to be embellished, there must be some truth in the statement or story. In this case, the truth is that Fiat DID talk about, to Bloomberg news no less, that they were considering moving Jeep production to China. That is the main point of the story in Bloomberg, and the main point of Romney’s statement.
The embellishment, if one supposes Romney uttered them purposefully, is about “all production” being moved to China. That is a “decorative”, or “fanciful”, addition to the story, by Romney, meant to “heighten the attractiveness” of his statement to the people he was speaking to. Those types of additions are rarely truthful, in any way, even as the technical wording might be.
Now, you might say, then, that Romney told a lie. That is an arguable point. What is not an arguable point, genius, is that the Romney statement was an embellishment of the truth, that Jeep production, as suggested by the parent company Fiat, is being considered in a move to China.
Maybe that’s why the Washington Post didn’t rate that statement as a lie, Lib1. Because it contained more truth than “fanciful” details.
Now, I’ve explained that the best I know how. If you still don’t get it, please refrain from placing your failings, in that regard, on me. It isn’t my fault, nor my problem, that your limited knowledge in word usage, or reading comprehension, no doubt administered by an ineffective liberal education machine, is not up to the task of discussing such things with adults.
@Liberal1 (Objectivity):
Kinda hard to claim such a thing, when Obama was not nearly old enough to be drafted, when it ended, isn’t it? Obama was born in 1961, and the last year men were called up in the draft was 1972.
I guess by those standards, you could also suggest that myself and my older brother “didn’t flagrantly avoid the draft”. Thanks, Lib1. Now I have a new “claim to fame”. Just like Obama has.
I’m not a draft dodger!
Sounds good. I think I’ll use it from now on.
No, Lib1, I don’t have that backwards. Greg presupposes a conclusion, and twists the facts presented within the statistics, polls, evidence, etc. in order to “prove” that presupposed conclusion.
The fact is, my “kind” do mount arguments disproving him. Again, it’s not our fault that you lack the ability to discern truth from fiction, fact from conjecture. And, as well, the arguments Greg brings up are arguable. Which is why we debate him. Unlike your own offerings, which are woefully absent of anything approaching points of debate. Which is why Aye suggested you are a “dump n run coward” here;
I don’t necessarily take ‘offense’, Lib1. It’s just that you liberal/progressives have no inkling as to what “main-stream” conservatism is about. You call anything to the right of your far left ideology “extreme” or “ultra”, offering that up as some kind of catch-all explanation for why conservatives say and think what they do.
I explained, in the past, that the liberal/progressive’s viewpoint of politics has changed drastically, moving to the left so far they are essentially socialists in their talk and actions, yet claim the mantle of ‘liberalism’ like they are kin to the classic liberals of the past. That they have, in fact, moved, while claiming to have stood still and that it’s the right that has moved. It’s all about perspective, Lib1. At least I can claim actual roots to conservatives in the past, with little or no evolution, or movement, rightward in comparison. Are you actually trying to claim the same, from the left-hand perspective, for yourself and the liberal/progressive politicians you support? Now that would be something. And typical. Trying to claim you are something that you demonstrably are not.
@Aye: Just like I said—not good argument—just emotive language (which is different from rational argument—or do you know the difference?)
This is the reason I appear not to answer many comments: I do not wish engage in irrational discussions. I choose not be bogged down by illogic, and to move on to another right wing site where someone might read my comment who is capable of free thought—not linked to a particular political or religious talking points—a hope which is the reason I blog on this site.
@Aye:
Aye, Lib1 didn’t call Romney’s statement an embellishment. I did. Or rather, suggested that the worst Romney’s statement could be considered was, in fact, an embellishment. And it was in response to Greg’s assertion that Romney’s statement was a lie. I said that “at worst, Romney can be accused of embellishment”. Lib1 took that and ran with it, showing his woefully inadequate understanding of the English language in the process. And he still keeps harping on it.
@Liberal1 (Objectivity):
Uh-huh…. Whatever.
What I find most amusing is that you’re not any smarter or more original now than when you were posting here under your tadcf screen name.
Romney’s actual ad does NOT say that ALL Jeeps are going to be made in China.
It says, (and I’m quoting) “…and sold Chrysler to Italians who are going to build Jeeps in China.”
It does not say ALL Jeeps, it simply says ”Jeeps.”
See it for yourself.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQ8P04q6jqE
Why all the anguish?
Bloomberg had the story.
Then the Italian owners of Chrysler adjusted their PR (at least until after the US election) and said they would build Jeeps (again not ALL Jeeps) in Brazil.
The Chrysler CEO came out and said the ad is flat out false. Yet….read his words closely…
Now the thing to notice is the claim Fiat, aka Chrysler must manufacture local to sell in China.
Notice how they are not going to export to China from the U.S.
That is in part, a direct demand from China in order to obtain access to their markets.
Companies are often forced to manufacture in China by their policies.
Last December China slapped a 22% tariff on large autos, of which a Jeep would be classified.
Jeeps manufactured in the United States will be for the U.S. domestic market, not for export to China.
@johngalt: If there is no draft, then you can’t be considered a draft dodger. Come on now, do you really consider that an effective argument? And don’t get all emotional on me. The fact that there was no draft to avoid in Obama’s time is anecdotal, and does not reflect on Romney’s situation where he actively participated in pro-war rallies during Vietnam, but got several deferments instead of serving in the war.
As I mentioned in a previous post, the reason I appear to “dump-and-run” is because I don’t like to get into emotional disagreements like this one. There is a difference between “mounting a legitimate argument”, and stating a divergent opinion, and pretending it’s an argument—you do the latter. There’s also a difference between a debate and a disagreement—also here you do the latter, and call it a debate (although you participate in the conservative habit of redefining words to fit your needs). I have yet to see you muster any facts to disprove anything—all you do is give your opinion (opinions are not necessarily facts).
Regarding conservatism, I know enough about the matter to distinguish between ‘Tea Party’ Conservatism, and mainstream conservatism. Your still young enough to have served in the Gulf War. But this kind of ultra-conservatism will die after a decade or so of Democratic presidential and/or congressional elections, and you will change along with the party—or go the way of the John Birch society.
@Liberal1 (Objectivity):
No, you just offer irrational statements without any grounding basis, and run away to do the same on another topic. That is your MO. We know this. You can claim something different, but like Obama, your record speaks for itself.
No, it seems more evident that you don’t wish to be bogged down in discussions where your unfailing faith in failure, like Obama, like progressivism, would be outed more clearly than it is.
Free thought? Funny you should mention that, Lib1. Aren’t you the one who berates those engaging in free thought behaviour, adding religious references and overtones to their comments, to such topics as abortion?
Sure, you are for “free thought”. As long as it agrees with your own warped ideology and sense of what’s “right” for people to believe. Like global warming. Like abortion.
No thanks, Lib1. I’ll take my “free thought” over your thought police anyday.
J.G. and A.V. I strongly codenm assassination threats coming from anyone.Cowards.
Aye For me, Huckabee’s video was a little strong.What was the fire meant to symbolize? When I watced it a 2nd time it reminded of that great Marine Corps add.
Methodists like myself often are guided by the Wesleyan Quadrilateral. We believe in dialogue over dogma the journey more important than the destination.Ck it out sometime.
I’ve been saying for 4 months this election will be decided in Ohio and winner will poll less than 51% of National vote.Polls be damned including Ras. I got no problem with the current Mitt the Moderate winning. It’s the Mitt that won the Repub. Primary I’m concerned with.
I’m looking forward to a very exciting Tues. and my hope is the country will unite behind and support the winner.I will.
J.G.,Larry and Aqua The POLL I’m watching most closely is the BCS Go Irish
Semper Fi
@Liberal1 (Objectivity):
Sort of like this, eh?
@Liberal1 (Objectivity):
Individual Latter Day Saints served as missionaries.
But 1% (or slightly less) of the US population during those days were LDS.
And, guess what?
1% of all American military deaths during the Vietnam conflict were LDS.
So, they served.
As a group, they served as much as any other group.
Individuals, on the other hand, got deferments for their own reasons, religious or otherwise.
My husband was disqualified at his medical for noisy foot/leg joints.
His feet, ankles and knees all ”popped” when he walked.
Apparently the MD thought he had some bone disorder.
But, other than being noisy, it has never bothered him.
No, I don’t take him hunting when I go. LOL
@Liberal1 (Objectivity):
No emotion there, Lib1. Just explaining that you are doing exactly as your ‘messiah’ does. Claim credit where none is due.
No, you suggested a comparison talking about apples and oranges. Yet again. Even if you believe that Romney’s deferrals were the result of “draft dodging”, you cannot claim that Obama was not one. They were never in the same situation, as far as that goes.
But that is typical of Obama-ites like yourself. Claiming some “positive” for Obama by reason of subtraction.
And if you truly believe that if the draft was still in effect when Obama became eligible, and that he WOULDN’T have dodged it, then you haven’t been paying attention to the few meager facts about him during his college-aged years. And I’ve got a bridge to sell you. On the moon.
@Nan G:
By Lib1’s rationale, your husband was a draft dodger, while Obama was not. Obama must, therefore, be better than your husband.
Logic has never been a strong suit of liberal/progressives.
@Richard Wheeler:
And yet, you imply that AV’s comment about Romney and assassination threats is “sick”. Although you claim to follow politics, Rich, I get the sense that you immediately reject any story that doesn’t fit your own narrow defined narrative of what is actually going on.
As for your religious viewpoint, I admit that I’m curious. Is the journey important, because if you journey as God suggests, the destination is an afterthought. A foregone conclusion, so to speak, and one that leads to heaven. Or, is the destination really not all that important. In my viewpoint, which is similar in that it focuses on the journey, if I live my life by how I believe Jesus would have lived it, then it leads to only one destination, rendering the worry about heaven/hell a moot point. Is that the same?