'08 Presidential Candidates: Who served & who didn't by CrevanReaver

Quote:
Originally posted by yinyang:
Since when is the military the be all, end all? And what do most of the wars we've fought in the last 60 years have to do with our freedoms?

Quote:
Originally posted by CrevanReaver:
...something to think about when you're casting your vote (either in the general election or in the primaries) on who should be Commander-in-Chief of the brave men and women who are risking their lives to protect American freedom. Remember most of the candidates weren't willing to take that risk.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 29, 2007 1:12 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

Yeah, that's what we want. Good ties between the presidency and the military. Something closer to a junta should do it.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 29, 2007 1:14 PM

Since the President isn't the one who directly commands the military, you still haven't answered the question.

----
I am on The List. We are The Forsaken and we aim to burn!
"We don't fear the reaper"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 29, 2007 1:14 PM

YINYANG

You were busy trying to get yourself lit on fire. It happens.

But, the Commander-in-Chief has military advisers and a brain, right? Besides, in the Constitution, there is no mention of military service as a requirement for president, so surely someone back then recognized that you don't have to have served in the military to lead it.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 29, 2007 1:20 PM

I hope none of you have ever bashed Bush over his military career or lack thereof. Some say Iraq is in the crapper because Bush knows nothing about war and does not listen to those who do. Perhaps more military experience could have mitigated or lessened this. Damned if you do, damned if you don't as always.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 29, 2007 1:20 PM

ANTIMASON

Quote:
posted by yin yeng- Since when is the military the be all, end all? And what do most of the wars we've fought in the last 60 years have to do with our freedoms?

i actually just heard this quote today, and your question reminded me of it

Dwight Eisenhower-

Quote:
i hate war as only a soldier who has lived it can, only as one who has seen its brutality, its futility, its stupidity.

it makes me think twice about Bushs military record(rather lack thereof)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 29, 2007 2:25 PM

YINYANG

You were busy trying to get yourself lit on fire. It happens.

I don't see how Bush's lack of military service and him not listening to his advisers are related. I take the advice of my doctor, even though I am not (nor will I ever be) one.

As far as Eisenhower's quote: It's great that he survived to say that, physically and mentally. Some people don't.

And, back to the original post, it is not cowardly or unpatriotic to say, "I do not want to aid in the military extension of the United States of America by serving in any of the armed forces," which is what I think is being implied by "weren't willing to take that risk."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 29, 2007 2:44 PM

It is prudent to expect the guy fixing your brakes to have automotive experience, your Doctor to have medical experience. It is prudent to expect the head of FEMA to have emergency management experience and the Commander-in-Chief to have military experience.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 29, 2007 3:14 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
It is prudent to expect the guy fixing your brakes to have automotive experience, your Doctor to have medical experience. It is prudent to expect the head of FEMA to have emergency management experience and the Commander-in-Chief to have military experience.

Yes, but the CiC isn't doing the actual fighting, nor should he be making on the ground decisions. That's what generals and a chain of command are for. The CiC's job is to appoint qualified people and be open-minded enough to listen to dissent from opposing opinions. Bush has done neither.

Now, I bashed Bush's military record repeatedly, but it had nothing to do with him being the CiC. I bashed his war record because he painted Kerry as weak and trashed Kerry's war record; all from the comfort of a cush Nat'l Guard post (which he may or may not have even completed, based on who you believe).

Now, I'm not Godwinning the thread here, do not read this next sentence as a comparison. But having military as a CiC does not always good decision making make. Remember, Hitler had war experience too, look what he did (two-front war that cost Germany its empire, anyone?). On the American side, we elected Grant president, and he didn't do too well either.

------------------------------------------
"A revolution without dancing is no revolution at all." - V

Anyone wanting to continue a discussion off board is welcome to email me - check bio for details.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 29, 2007 3:44 PM

Some bosses are experienced and knowledgable in their fields and some are not. The people under them can tell in a hurry. Which boss would you rather work for?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 29, 2007 3:56 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

"It is prudent to expect the guy fixing your brakes to have automotive experience, your Doctor to have medical experience."

By your reasoning, it's required for the guy fixing your brakes to have been a brake. Or for your doctor to have your particular illness ...

And that's how your simple-minded concepts fall apart.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 29, 2007 4:05 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
Some bosses are experienced and knowledgable in their fields and some are not. The people under them can tell in a hurry. Which boss would you rather work for?

The one that gets the job done right and knows how to delegate authority. I've worked for some great bosses through the years that didn't know anything about certain aspects of their various companies, schools, etc., but those bosses all knew where to go when they wanted something done right.

The President cannot possibly be an expert in every field. That's just a fact. But a good leader knows who to turn to when it comes to getting the job done. I want a leader who says, "Hmm, I don't know, but I'll see who's the expert in the field and get that guy on the job right away." Bush, in his presidency, has given us "Heckuva Job Brownie", Gonzales, Ashcroft, Rummy, Bolton, et. al.; through Rummy, fired several good generals and forced out others; and keeps people long past when they should go (Rove).

The CiC doesn't need to know jack about combat (though it would be nice if they experienced it, just to see what real war is like), he (or she) just needs to know how to listen to those that do know about it. When the generals say "this isn't a great idea," a good leader needs to say "why not?", not "you're fired, give me someone that thinks we can do it."

------------------------------------------
"A revolution without dancing is no revolution at all." - V

Anyone wanting to continue a discussion off board is welcome to email me - check bio for details.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 29, 2007 4:48 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
By your reasoning, it's required for the guy fixing your brakes to have been a brake. Or for your doctor to have your particular illness ...

And that's how your simple-minded concepts fall apart.

Huh?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 29, 2007 5:43 PM

Something for you to ponder:

If you constantly have a "war time president," all there will be is war.

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:

It is prudent to expect the guy fixing your brakes to have automotive experience, your Doctor to have medical experience. It is prudent to expect the head of FEMA to have emergency management experience and the Commander-in-Chief to have military experience.

Where you line of thinking here completely fails is that the guy fixing you brakes actually fixes your brakes, the Doctor is actually practicing medicine and the head of FEMA is actually making structural decisions, etc that seriously effect how FEMA works, etc.

In /reality/, the president does not make structural changes to the military, nor does (s)he make tactical decisions, nor does (s)he actively participate in military operations. (S)he just makes a POLITICAL decision about who to attack. And even then, it's almost entirely based on what other people think (e.g. the actual experts).

In the end, it would actually be prudent to have someone that is actually intelligent in office without military experience than someone who has some military experience but is a complete dumbass.

----
I am on The List. We are The Forsaken and we aim to burn!
"We don't fear the reaper"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 29, 2007 6:47 PM

PIRATENEWS

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!

John Manchurian Candidate McCain served in the armies of Communist Russia, communist china and Communist North Vietnam, during his VIP treatment during his "POW" hotel vacations during the Vietnam Wars. When he wasn't being gangraped by his US military commanders in the Hanoi Hilton, caught on film for blackmail today.

"You can't stop the signal!"
-Mr Universe, Pirate TV

FIREFLY SERENITY PILOT MUSIC VIDEO V2
Tangerine Dream - Thief Soundtrack: Confrontation
https://video.indymedia.org/en/2007/02/716.shtml
http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?vid=8cd2bd0379340120e7a6ed00f2a53ee5
.1044556
www.myspace.com/piratenewsctv

DRIVE BY MIND CONTROL: FREE TV EPISODES ONLINE
www.myspace.com/driveonfox

Does that seem right to you?
www.scifi.com/onair/

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 29, 2007 11:48 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

BDN

Here is your position, reduced to its bare-bones structure

military-leader : military :: brake-fixer : -----

What fits there is 'brake'.

Or, in English, to know enough about the military to lead it, you have to have been in the military. To know enough about brakes to fix them you have to have been ....

And that's how your simple-minded concepts fall apart.

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
By your reasoning, it's required for the guy fixing your brakes to have been a brake. Or for your doctor to have your particular illness ...

And that's how your simple-minded concepts fall apart.

Huh?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 30, 2007 12:33 AM

FREMDFIRMA

I don't see where it matters.

The CinC sets the POLITICAL objectives of the armed forces, and then hands them to the GENERALS to execute.

That's like saying, for example, my units 1st Lt should be an expert rifleman *giggle* which he certainly wasn't, but he WAS an expect tactician.

Command handed down the objectives, him and the captain culled out what our part would be, put a basic framework to it and handed it down to the platoon sarge, who fleshed it out, assigned responsibilities and gave them to the squad leaders.

Who's squads then carried them out.

Nowhere in this at any point was the loot required or needed with a rifle, and he performed HIS part and responsibilites expertly and efficiently, which coming from an E-3 grunt and pointman, is damn high praise for a silverbar.

The CinC has the responsibility of defining the objectives - that's *IT*, period, end of story.

For that, military experience is neither preferable nor required, we have plenty of brass in the pentagon to do the job and I think a lot of our failure rests with them, because it's THEIR job to see it done.

I know it's more complex than that, and there's fault when the advisors and generals tell the CinC it cannot be done and he won't listen, sure...

But it's like demanding that the CEO of sony have built walkmans on the production line as a pre-requisite for what he does, when they have quite literally nothing to do with each other.

I don't care if a CinC *served*, I care that they have good sense, a far more important and useful pre-req, although admittedly a rare one in presidential candidates.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 30, 2007 3:30 AM

EARLY

the only reason I care whether or not someone was in the military is if they are a war hawk. Anyone who is hawkish but never served in the military like say oh draft dodgers giuliani and Cheney I have no respect for. If you are a dove or at least only support war for defense or as a completely necessary last resort, then I don't mind if you weren't in the military. But these chicken hawks make me sick to my stomach.

www.RonPaul2008.com

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 30, 2007 3:47 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Here is your position, reduced to its bare-bones structure

military-leader : military :: brake-fixer : -----

What fits there is 'brake'.

Or, in English, to know enough about the military to lead it, you have to have been in the military. To know enough about brakes to fix them you have to have been ....

And that's how your simple-minded concepts fall apart.

I believe I said it was prudent to think the guy fixing your brakes has automotive EXPERIENCE, not that he/she used to be a brake. What if your mechanic is brand new with only classroom EXPERIENCE? What if your mechanic used to work on boats and wanted a career change. You see, the key word is EXPERIENCE. What if your Doctor is a first year resident or you go to see an OBGYN but a ear, nose, and throat specialist is filling in. Do you think it is prudent that the head of FEMA has emergency management EXPERIENCE? Do you not think it prudent that the Commander-in-Chief of the American armed forces has military EXPERIENCE? A simple yes or no will suffice, anything more would probably go right over my head.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 30, 2007 4:36 AM

SIMONWHO

I think even a yes/no question is too complicated for you. Try this one instead; complete this phrase:

"USA! USA! ...!" (3 letters)

If that's too hard, I can try and create something even more simplistic.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 30, 2007 4:45 AM

Thanks for your input Simon. Do you have an opinion on the thread's topic?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 30, 2007 4:59 AM

HERO

What about listing Presidents who served. Now that would be some perspective.

I think you'll find that the distinction between good and bad presidents often has little to do with their having served. Sure, the right service can give you some good Presidential skills. Ike is a good example. But it can also mean very little. Captain Ronald Reagan's World War II moviemaking didn't contribute much to his leadership ability (although if you read what he said, it did give him a fundamental understanding of the value of capitalism to productivity).

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 30, 2007 5:14 AM

MALBADINLATIN

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
I don't see where it matters. The CinC sets the POLITICAL objectives of the armed forces, and then hands them to the GENERALS to execute.

A President that has killed a man with his own bare hands has got to be a better leader. (rolling eyes)

It's amazing how much panic one honest man can spread among a multitude of hypocrites

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 30, 2007 5:15 AM

FREMDFIRMA

Experience in what ?

Deciding what we want to accomplish in a given action ?

I can find four year olds that know how to do that, and believe me, would gladly replace our current CinC with one given how piss poor a job of it he's done.

Any CEO, hell, any Construction Foreman, has sufficient command experience to do the job of CinC, we have generals for the purpose of deciding and planning how best to achieve those objectives - isn't that what we have them for ?
What we pay them for ?
And yes, they screwed it, imop.

If you're going to ignore this basic concept, there's no further point in discussing it.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 30, 2007 5:42 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by MalBadInLatin:
A President that has killed a man with his own bare hands has got to be a better leader. (rolling eyes)

Perhaps more restraint would be shown if the President has experience. And since when did military experience mean killing. What about support services, intelligence, medical. Military experience also includes training, following and or giving orders.
I have never stated that military experience is required. My position is that military experience would be prudent for the Commander-in-Chief. The President cannot be all things to all people but he/she should be qualified in most aspects of the job IMHO. I find it hard to believe that no one can agree that the more experienced the boss is the smoother things run. Some Posters are far too polarized IMHO.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 30, 2007 6:00 AM

HERO

Quote:
Originally posted by MalBadInLatin:
A President that has killed a man with his own bare hands has got to be a better leader. (rolling eyes)

A vote for Hillary?

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 30, 2007 6:08 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

BDN: Perhaps if the President had been a nuclear engineer or a biologist he could have evaluated the WMD threat better. Or, if he had been an actuary he could have come up with a better plan for Social Security. Maybe if he had been an economist he could have halted the flight of manufacturing to China.

My point is that the President is not expected to be an expert on everyhting, or even anything... EXCEPT he must be an expert on hiring and listening to the real experts who know sumpthin' about sumpthin'. And this is where Bush has failed. When experts contradicted his fantasy-scape, they were fired and replaced by political hacks who whispered sweet nothings in his ear. The only people Bush listens to are Cheney and Rove.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 30, 2007 6:29 AM

KANEMAN

I agree with BDN's post 100%. If your suit needs to be fitted you take it to a person with tailoring EXPERIENCE. Ruse if your dildo stops working, you would most likely bring it to Sig..he has EXPERIENCE. What is wrong with thinking that the commander in chief should have military EXPERIENCE?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 30, 2007 6:29 AM

MALBADINLATIN

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
Perhaps more restraint would be shown if the President has experience.

You mean like if Bush went to Vietnam and got shot at or thrown in a POW camp...he might not have started this catastrof#!k of a war?

Quote:
And since when did military experience mean killing.

If it doesn't, how is it any better than experience working for an insurance company, or a ditch digger?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 30, 2007 6:53 AM

Wholly crap I agree with Hero on something!

Dwight D. Eisenhower is another great example of a (Republican) President that served yet is the one (I believe) that coined the phrase 'Military-Industrial Complex':

"""
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
—Farewell Address, January 17, 1961
"""

There was a documentary lately about him that was great, but I can't remember the name.

But, I'm going to have to say that I wasn't so much his military career that made him, more along the lines that he was quite clever.

----
I am on The List. We are The Forsaken and we aim to burn!
"We don't fear the reaper"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 30, 2007 7:04 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
What is wrong with thinking that the commander in chief should have military EXPERIENCE?

Kaneman, the President is more than the Commander in Chief. And post-911 would seem to require more than military experience, since military actions does not seem to be the solution. More along the lines of diplomacy perhaps, or intelligence. (Something Bush is sorely lacking.)

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 30, 2007 7:14 AM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

"EXPERIENCE"

SignyM beat me to it, but I too wanted to point out that el presidente should be an experienced actuary, physician, economist, scientist, welfare mom, HMO patient, engineer ... to fill all the roles of the president as leader of ...

... OR you could pick a president for his/her policies AND ability to draw on well-qualified advisors.

So hard to choose here.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 30, 2007 7:15 AM

CAUSAL

Quote:
Originally posted by yinyang:
And, back to the original post, it is not cowardly or unpatriotic to say, "I do not want to aid in the military extension of the United States of America by serving in any of the armed forces," which is what I think is being implied by "weren't willing to take that risk."

Not a huge fan of the military, are we?

________________________________________________________________________

- Grand High Poobah of the Mythical Land of Iowa, and Keeper of State Secrets
- Captain, FFF.net Grammar Police

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 30, 2007 7:46 AM

HERO

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Kaneman, the President is more than the Commander in Chief. And post-911 would seem to require more than military experience, since military actions does not seem to be the solution. More along the lines of diplomacy perhaps, or intelligence. (Something Bush is sorely lacking.)

I've read the books written by Stormin Norman and Tommy Franks, seems that CENTCOM commander should be a great job prep for President according to the qualifications you seem to be looking for.

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 30, 2007 7:56 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
Not a huge fan of the military, are we?

I'm not.

It has its uses but... DANG! Hundreds of thousands of young testosterone-fueled guys with guns, trained to obey and kill. Kinda sounds a little creepy, doesn't it?

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 30, 2007 8:01 AM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

"I've read the books written by Stormin Norman and Tommy Franks, seems that CENTCOM commander should be a great job prep for President according to the qualifications you seem to be looking for."

And then we have Colin Powell who only seemed to know how to follow orders, over a cliff.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 30, 2007 8:01 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
BDN: Perhaps if the President had been a nuclear engineer or a biologist he could have evaluated the WMD threat better. Or, if he had been an actuary he could have come up with a better plan for Social Security. Maybe if he had been an economist he could have halted the flight of manufacturing to China.

Are any of the above mentioned positions written into the President's job description like Commander-in-Chief is?

Quote:

When experts contradicted his fantasy-scape, they were fired and replaced by political hacks who whispered sweet nothings in his ear. The only people Bush listens to are Cheney and Rove.

What does Bush have to do with the military careers of the presidential candidates?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 30, 2007 8:09 AM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

"What does Bush have to do with the military careers of the presidential candidates?"

He had military experience and look what good it did?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 30, 2007 8:11 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by MalBadInLatin:
Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
Perhaps more restraint would be shown if the President has experience.

You mean like if Bush went to Vietnam and got shot at or thrown in a POW camp...he might not have started this catastrof#!k of a war?

Who can say. Perhaps the war would be going differently if Bush had a better grasp on military matters. Perhaps more experience would temper his decision making, make him more open to different scenarios. There is a huge difference to being CiC in peace time as opposed to times of conflict.

Quote:
And since when did military experience mean killing.

Quote:
If it doesn't, how is it any better than experience working for an insurance company, or a ditch digger?

The President would have a better understanding of the way the armed forces work and their strengths, weaknesses and limitations. What insurance or ditch digging have to do with being the CiC escapes me.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 30, 2007 8:15 AM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

So you need a CiC who has military experience during wartime - like Vietnam? Why, son, that fits Bush to a T. I guess he's your poster-boy, then.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 30, 2007 9:44 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Once again referring to TV Nation (in the Privilege thread) did you see the skit about company CEOs being challenged to perform the most basic functions with their products? The President of Ford being challenged to change oil? The CEO of IBM being challeneged to format a disk?

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 30, 2007 9:46 AM

MALBADINLATIN

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
What insurance or ditch digging have to do with being the CiC escapes me.

Nothing really, I was going for arbitrary. I think I did pretty well judging by your reaction. Eisenhower was a damn fine President and one valuable thing he learned from his miltary career, that he incorporated into his Presidential career, was the fine art of delegation. He surrounded himself with people smarter than him, and listened to them. Pretty much the opposite of what Bush does. Bush surrounds himself with smart people, then has them think and speak only to suit he and Karl Rove's agenda. It's a misguided....and therefore evil agenda methinks! Oh! and by the way...Bush dodged service, a real hero Republican man would have volunteered to go to Vietnam

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 30, 2007 3:33 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by MalBadInLatin:
Eisenhower was a damn fine President and one valuable thing he learned from his miltary career, that he incorporated into his Presidential career, was the fine art of delegation. He surrounded himself with people smarter than him, and listened to them. Pretty much the opposite of what Bush does.

So you agree that a military background is helpful to a President, thanks for your support. With the exception of K man it has been lacking for my position in this thread.

Quote:
Bush surrounds himself with smart people, then has them think and speak only to suit he and Karl Rove's agenda. It's a misguided....and therefore evil agenda methinks!

Kind of a tangent, methinks!

Quote:
Oh! and by the way...Bush dodged service, a real hero Republican man would have volunteered to go to Vietnam

So you agree that a military background is helpful to a President, thanks for your support. With the exception of K man it has been lacking for my position in this thread.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 30, 2007 4:01 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

"So you need a CiC who has military experience during wartime - like Vietnam? Why, son, that fits Bush to a T. I guess he's your poster-boy, then."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 30, 2007 4:58 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:

Quote:
Originally posted by MalBadInLatin:
Eisenhower was a damn fine President and one valuable thing he learned from his miltary career, that he incorporated into his Presidential career, was the fine art of delegation. He surrounded himself with people smarter than him, and listened to them. Pretty much the opposite of what Bush does.

So you agree that a military background is helpful to a President, thanks for your support. With the exception of K man it has been lacking for my position in this thread.

Are you sure you're in good company? Because if you say MalBadInLatin fast, it sounds like Mal Bin-Laden! And according to the media and what they did to someone else's name (Obama) that's not a good thing!

EDIT: Fixed typos and whatnot.

----
I am on The List. We are The Forsaken and we aim to burn!
"We don't fear the reaper"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 30, 2007 7:27 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
So you agree that a military background is helpful to a President, thanks for your support. With the exception of K man it has been lacking for my position in this thread.

No one is disagreeing with your position that a military background could be helpful. In fact, you'll find that almost everyone agrees with that statement.

What people are disagreeing with is the idea that military service is necessary for a good CiC. That's the difference. It is no more necessary to the job than a doctorate in economics, physics, or any other field that a decision might have to be made in. If our president doesn't have to have an M.D. to make health care policy, he doesn't need military service to make military decisions - but either would be helpful.

------------------------------------------
"A revolution without dancing is no revolution at all." - V

Anyone wanting to continue a discussion off board is welcome to email me - check bio for details.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 31, 2007 2:40 AM

SIMONWHO

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
Thanks for your input Simon. Do you have an opinion on the thread's topic?

I'm sorry, the answer I was looking for was "USA". Never mind, Bush didn't know the answer either.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 31, 2007 3:31 AM