Dems Would Support The Troops

Dems would support the troops, of course they would - assuming they knew who they were.

Claire McCaskill campaign busted for an Iraqi veteran fraud.

Why is Claire McCaskill running attack ads with an anti-war fraud? Why are democrats with VoteVets.org running national anti-war ads with an anti-war fraud?

Because, like John Kerry and the rest of the Liberals, they don't really support the troops, let alone know who they are.

Comments

[Mark]

Dems would support the troops, of course they would - assuming they knew who they were.

Obviously, neither do you.

They are all Iraq vets in the ad, as the site you link states even. Reading comprehension rocks.

[Sincerely]

Of course they have no clue who they are. The Anti-War folks do not give a flying *uck what the troops think about why they are in Iraq.

I saw it first hand the last presidential election. Not far from the court house is Willow Grove Naval Air Station. These guys were lined up at the door every morning to make sure they got their vote in. Some had been in war before, most had not. All if not most of them supported President Bush and the war in Iraq. And I am sure they continue to do so.

[jaime]

How come the vast majority of vets are running as Democrats?

[Phoenix]

"How come the vast majority of vets are running as Democrats."

You must be coming off your mania. That sentence makes no sense.

[jaime]

"The Anti-War folks do not give a flying *uck what the troops think about why they are in Iraq."

"How come the vast majority of vets are running as Democrats?"

See what I'm getting at? The troops leaving Iraq are not sounding like George Bush. They're sounding like...Paul Reichoff and, Paul Hackett and Tammy Duckworth.

Shouldn't you be out with Steel Turman getting a black eye from him and being put in your place like "the bitch" he considers you?

[Phoenix]

Here I am reading along wondering if Queen Mania is going to actually address what I said and recognize how stupid his sentence sounded and then I come across the last sentence.

HA HA HA HA.... oooooooooooooh hahahahaha....

Beyond the fact that I am no man's chattel, I want to thank you for making me bust a gut...... hahahahahaha

You have given up your edge, bitch.

[Dan Riehl]

like "the bitch" he considers you?

Don't underestimate the value of having a good Bitch.

[Purple Avenger]

How come the vast majority of vets are running as Democrats?

Of course you have a source for this claim right?

[jaime]

"Of course you have a source for this claim right?"

Ummm...yeah.

http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2006-09/2006-09-28-voa46.cfm?CFID=55424182&CFTOKEN=41269601

"Patrick Murphy is one of about 10 veterans who fought in the Iraq and Afghan wars running for Congress this term. Only one is running as a Republican."

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-01-22-war-vets_x.htm

"Duckworth is the only seriously wounded combat veteran running this year...
But at least nine other veterans who served in the post-Sept. 11 military have announced House bids. All but one — Republican Van Taylor in Texas — are Democrats who have criticized the Bush administration's conduct of the war."

Now go sit in your corner, ass.

[Phoenix]

Meds up, Jaime,

You still don't get it. "....is one of about 10 veterans who fought..." is hardly a 'vast majority'. The vast majority of vets are home, having a brew, thinking about family, job, car, NASCAR, what a dickbrain Kerry is, NASCAR, the latest game, and probably thanking God they lived to enjoy watching NASCAR.

Now go sit in your corner with the Dunce Hat on.

[jaime]

Excuse me...I should have written "The vast majority of vets 'running for office' are Democrats.

But this sentence in a later thread...

"The troops leaving Iraq are not sounding like George Bush. They're sounding like...Paul Reichoff and, Paul Hackett and Tammy Duckworth."

...should have made it clearer.

Or maybe the fact that I used the word running. I gather no matter how clear I wrote it, I should expect purposeful ignorance from you.

THE VAST MAJORITY OF "WAR ON TERROR" VETERANS RUNNING FOR CONGRESS...THE AMERICAN CONGRESS....ARE DEMOCRATS. Why do you think 9 out of 10 of them ran as Democrats?

So when someone writes something like this "The Anti-War folks do not give a flying *uck what the troops think about why they are in Iraq." Then whay are "the vast majority of vets are running as Democrats?"

Now go be the ideal Republican woman and get pregnant and vote however your husband votes. You do know that's why they go after the NASCAR dads?

[larry]

is it just me, or has anyone else noticed that as the election approaches the nitwit dems are getting a mite testy? sensing yet another instance of 'even though we swear to kick ass & take names, and the polls that interview only dems all seem to agree with us, we're going to lose'?

just like 2002 & 2004?

it's yet another democrat fatal flaw: the truth will set you free. but dems can't tell the truth - no matter what - and they're so far gone they even lie to themselves, like when they discuss how well they'll do in the upcoming elections. expect lotsa cursing, weepy donkeys next wednesday morning.

[Phoenix]

Phoenix has a jones for Jaime! :)

Now that you bring it up, let's hump. I've come to yearn for a man who can stick it no matter what and who can keep on plugging no matter what. Damn, honey....don't you know a girl just craves a man who keeps on keeping on. I'm for you... You're for me... Together we won't make three. No kids. If the libs take over, the world will be too dangerous for raising babies. Damn.....this epiphany has me hot. Do you live on the east coast? I live in the middle right near the capital of the world, so getting intertwined will be no problem except for wearing our parts out. Oh yum! Oh... I'm not a republican woman, but I do have a race car. Does that work? We independents need nippletwiddlery just like anyone.

Kiss kiss! :}

[hobo]

My goodness, the blog is so hot I have to turn the air conditioner on while reading it and I live in San Diego. I would NOT like to see all of you guys and gals in the same room together.

Anyway, I just finished reading an article on cnn.com that drew excerpts from a simulated war study done a few years ago regarding attacking Iraq and the assumed repercussions. One thing that stood out was that the simulation concluded there would have to be 400,000 troops on the ground for security and to maintain order while a new government is set up. Today we have 125,000 and the place is a mess.

[Phoenix]

Hobo,

Bummer. Consider the source, but even with that latitude, it does look bad. If the neo-cons did this simulation, why then did they not adhere to the options? As well, as things deteriorated, why did they not send more troops? The generals on the ground kept saying they didn't need them. And it wasn't just one or two generals saying that - they all said it.

As far as all of us in the same room? I think it'd be great. We'd probably have a blast. Human nature does a U-turn online, so I figure in a face-to-face situation, our inherent good manners would rule. ... maybe.. :)

[David]

Biotech Combany in India Supplying Jatrobha Curcas Feeds and Tissue culture Saplings of Orchids and Other Cut Flower Varietiess.