Jump to content

Romney, The Inevitable Nominee


Michael Hardner

Recommended Posts

Guest American Woman

No I don't because Romney was a spokes person for a Pro Vietnam war protest group saying things like it was just like WWII.

I can't really find anything on this. Do you have a link supporting this?

You don't get to pretend Vietnam is a super just war then say "But I didn't serve because I had better things to do for my Church". Kennedy believed in a War so he enlisted and gave it his all. The man was a war hero. Romney just banged the war Drum then put his church first.

Again, I'd appreciate some evidence of his "bang[ing] the war drum." Seems to me that would go against his religion, no?

JFK was a super Rich spoiled Candidate just like Romney in a lot of ways. Only difference is Kennedy in his history always put America and the American People first in his life history and Romney hasn't. I hope this is how the Republicans defend Romney's draft dogging of Vietnam because it wont sell.

Being a Democrat, I won't be voting for Romney, but I just don't see evidence of him being a strong supporter of the Vietnam war.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

He lived in the Church headquarters for the last year of his work. Prior to that, regular apartments, some without indoor plumbing. Why are you being so Obtuse? :rolleyes:

*cough* Bill *cough* Clinton.

Again we only have Romney's word on that one Shady. No one not one person is backing Mitt up on where he lived his other year. Deal with it, the story will be Romney lived in a Palace avoiding the war while kids were dying.

Clinton NEVER agreed with the war Shady. Little bit of a difference he NEVER protested for the WAR while he was living in a Mansion. Sorry we get Romney he doesn't want to make the sacrifice for his country when his church calls.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being a Democrat, I won't be voting for Romney, but I just don't see evidence of him being a strong supporter of the Vietnam war.

Yep, I don't either. I don't understand what punked's obsession is with Vietnam anyways. It really has nothing much to do with American politics anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't really find anything on this. Do you have a link supporting this?

Again, I'd appreciate some evidence of his "bang[ing] the war drum." Seems to me that would go against his religion, no?

Being a Democrat, I won't be voting for Romney, but I just don't see evidence of him being a strong supporter of the Vietnam war.

Yeah he was the spokes person for a Pro Vietnam protest group that went to anti Vietnam protests and protested against the anit-war protesters because of how much they believed in the war. He even backed the draft as long as he could avoid it by going to Paris to live in a Mansion. Speaks to his beliefs and hypocrite doesn't it?

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/01/sign-of-the-times-a-photo-shows-romney-backing-vietnam-draft/

Edited by punked
Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL, you speak of it like it's a scandal or some type of criminal wrong-doing! :lol: Perhaps if he just left a girl to drown, you'd be much more forgiving and accepting. :rolleyes:

Hahaha that is all you got eh? He is running against Ron Paul and Rick Perry right now buddy not Ted Kennedy he already lost to that guy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest American Woman

And yet the Kennedy's lost a son serving in a War they believed in and had another one who almost died.

Do you realize why Joseph Kennedy lost his ambassadorship? He tried to keep the U.S. out of WWII.

“I’m willing to spend all I’ve got left to keep us out of the war.”

His loyalty was to his own power. He wanted power and would do what it took to get it. At the time his sons served, he realized it was necessary in order for them to succeed in politics. He was raising a future president, and would do whatever it took to achieve that goal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah he was the spokes person for a Pro Vietnam protest group that went to anti Vietnam protests and protested against the anit-war protesters because of how much they believed in the war. He even backed the draft as long as he could avoid it by going to Paris to live in a Mansion. Speaks to his beliefs and hypocrite doesn't it?

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/01/sign-of-the-times-a-photo-shows-romney-backing-vietnam-draft/

I see, so holding a sign that says "speak out, don't sit in" is somehow supporting the war? Complete nonsense. That protest was a protest against the taking over of the University President's office. You're really grasping now punked. Yikes. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you realize why Joseph Kennedy lost his ambassadorship? He tried to keep the U.S. out of WWII.

“I’m willing to spend all I’ve got left to keep us out of the war.”

His loyalty was to his own power. He wanted power and would do what it took to get it. At the time his sons served, he realized it was necessary in order for them to succeed in politics. He was raising a future president, and would do whatever it took to achieve that goal.

The Kennedy's hated that war so much that they lost a son and had another who had live with terrible back pain for the rest of his heroics in it right? They must have really loved their country to fight in a war they didn't believe in, instead of going to live in a palace in Paris.

Edited by punked
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hahaha that is all you got eh? He is running against Ron Paul and Rick Perry right now buddy not Ted Kennedy he already lost to that guy.

Yep, all I've got is a dead girl. Unlike you're giant scandal of where somebody lived while they were doing work abroad. :rolleyes:

/facepalm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good point. Also, I'm not sure why it's Romney's fault that he drew a high number when he was eligible for the draft.

None of this is his "fault". There have always been conscientious objectors, and the fact that his religion demanded this response, and that the LDS worked with the government on all this should make this a non-issue.

To my mind, we're not talking about what's right and wrong here, but what will fly with the electorate. We're talking about campaign strategy and how it will play out. Waldo referred to MLW as a no-spin zone, and I agree with that stance.

Bill Clinton, John Kerry and George W. Bush all had different experiences with the war, and dealt with the issue with different strategies - some successful, some not.

One other point - political discussion today is all about campaigns, and hardly about policy at all. As much as I don't like to use morality-laden words such as "good" and "bad", I would say that this focus is a "bad" thing in that a good campaign can push anybody to victory with policy being a secondary consideration. Or so it seems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah he was the spokes person for a Pro Vietnam protest group that went to anti Vietnam protests and protested against the anit-war protesters because of how much they believed in the war. He even backed the draft as long as he could avoid it by going to Paris to live in a Mansion. Speaks to his beliefs and hypocrite doesn't it?

Seriously, this is just spin. These people are all politicians from an early age. They're more concerned with the appearance of hypocrisy than hypocrisy itself. Go ahead and throw stones at Romney if you must, but do yourself a favour and don't believe the hype.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

None of this is his "fault". There have always been conscientious objectors, and the fact that his religion demanded this response, and that the LDS worked with the government on all this should make this a non-issue.

To my mind, we're not talking about what's right and wrong here, but what will fly with the electorate. We're talking about campaign strategy and how it will play out. Waldo referred to MLW as a no-spin zone, and I agree with that stance.

Bill Clinton, John Kerry and George W. Bush all had different experiences with the war, and dealt with the issue with different strategies - some successful, some not.

One other point - political discussion today is all about campaigns, and hardly about policy at all. As much as I don't like to use morality-laden words such as "good" and "bad", I would say that this focus is a "bad" thing in that a good campaign can push anybody to victory with policy being a secondary consideration. Or so it seems.

I agree he did what his church told him to do instead of what he supported and what the country dictated. I agree he put his Church and its beliefs in front of his country which is fine but justifies the question of his faith a little more.

PS his father also supported the war during this time but ended up opposing near the end. So unlike the Kennedy's who opposed the war and died it in anyway the Romney's supported it as long as they didn't have to right anything right?

Edited by punked
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest American Woman

The Kennedy's hated that war so much that they lost a son and had another who had live with terrible back pain for the rest of his heroics in it right? They must have really loved their country to fight in a war they didn't believe in, instead of going to live in a palace in Paris.

He did what he had to do politically, for him to win. It's wasn't his love for his country as much as it was a desire to put a Kennedy in the White House, IMO. He had hoped it would be him, but his views on the war ended that. So one could say that he loved the idea of a son in the White House so much that he let them go off to war even though he didn't think we should be in it.

Edited by American Woman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ummm, yeah. He did what he had to do politically, for him to win. It's wasn't his love for his country as much as it was a desire to put a Kennedy in the White House. He had hoped it would be him, but his views on the war ended that. So one could say that he loved the idea of a son in the White House so much that he let them go off to war even though he didn't think we should be in it.

Listen actions speak louder then words. On this one Romney's family and himself supported the war as long as they didn't have serve their country. Kennedy's on the other hand opposed the war and yet paid for their love of country with the life of their oldest son. I can only speak to what their actions say about them not their motivations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest American Woman

....unlike the Kennedy's who opposed the war and died it in anyway the Romney's supported it as long as they didn't have to right anything right?

What makes you think the sons opposed the war?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest American Woman

Listen actions speak louder then words. On this one Romney's family and himself supported the war as long as they didn't have serve their country. Kennedy's on the other hand opposed the war and yet paid for their love of country with the life of their oldest son. I can only speak to what their actions say about them not their motivations.

You keep referring to this "love of his country." Where are you getting that from?? He wanted the White House. He did what it took to get his family there. Do you think that was "love of country" or "love of a Kennedy in the White House?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You keep referring to this "love of his country." Where are you getting that from?? He wanted the White House. He did what it took to get his family there. Do you think that was "love of country" or "love of a Kennedy in the White House?"

Again I can make up motivation about Mitt Romney as well but that does not mean what I "think" Romney believes is what he believes. I am just going on record on this one. If you are going to compare Kennedy to Romney then you better be ready to defend their different choices in life. Fact is either Romney is a liar and didn't support the war or he put his Church above his country and war he believed in. Either way it isn't good for Romney. Unlike Kennedy who we can say fought in a war he may or may not have supported and actually served his country instead of flying to Paris to live in a Mansion. If you want to compare their faiths then you gotta be ready for actual examples of Romney putting his faith before country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest American Woman

Maybe they supported it like Mitt did but they served their country unlike Mitt.

The whole country supported it - unlike Vietnam. People who refused to serve in Vietnam were admired by a lot of people. And once again, I'm failing to see this great support of the Vietnam War by Mitt.

I'm no fan of Romney while I am an admirer of JFK, but I just don't see it the way you are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree he did what his church told him to do instead of what he supported and what the country dictated. I agree he put his Church and its beliefs in front of his country which is fine but justifies the question of his faith a little more.

1. The question of right or wrong.

If somebody has a deep belief in pacifism then to my mind that's a choice of ones one principles versus laws of the country. That's a tough but principled choice. I don't understand why Romney Sr. (and Jr. ?) flip-flopped on that, but in the end they seemed to make that choice.

Do we need to make a campaign issue over someone's moral choices from 45 years ago ? Maybe sometimes, but I don't think it matters one whit to the 2012 campaign.

Also, pacifism is a hallmark of liberalism so how can we rightly criticize someone for making a choice that we ourselves might agree with ? If we're all supposed to have 100% consistent and moral approaches to things, what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

2. The real question - will it fly ?

Who knows ? There's no telling what will bother the masses and what will wound a candidate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think those interviews he did with the press during the protest are still in some reporters notes some where and it will come in the general. It may or may not be a non issue but Remember 2004. Romney is the Republican Kerry on A LOT of issue. It might not matter but it might.

I concur with that.

And, again, it concerns me that what a 19-year-old did in the 1960s has much more chance of being a factor than, say, what the president plans to do about legislative gridlock and campaign finance for example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...