Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics and News' started by PJABBER, Nov 5, 2012.
How exactly did they fight the cold war???
Did they hand out parkas and cold weather clothing???
Donald Trump also endorses Romney and appeared on stage with him. Kinda blows your theory up.
All retired. And all of them put together carry less weight than Powell's endorsement.
I googled the last name just for the hell of it:
Yeah I'm sure he wants the best man for the job and isn't endorsing the man most likely not to cut federal spending for which his consulting firm relies on.
Or maybe it's just because him and Romney both hate teh gays. /s
As stated above, active serving military are restricted from much of what others can do politically.
The DOD directive is here - Political Activities by Members of the Armed Forces
Funny, but not surprising, that the thread is going the way of criticizing officers that had 20 - 30 years of distinguished, honorable leadership in national service for holding equally honorable and distinguished civilian leadership jobs after retirement.
Perhaps you would be impressed if they were community organizers for ACORN? After all, that was the experience most valued by Obama supporters four years ago. Still is, now that I think of it.
Military officers tend to have right of center political views? Surprise surprise.
Terrance Dake is the Senior Advisor to the Chief Executive Officer of Aviall Services Inc., "a provider of aftermarket supply-chain management services for the aerospace, defense and marine industries. General Dake is a major part of Aviall's movement into the U.S. Government market, providing supply chain management functions to the U.S. military and other government agencies. Before coming to Aviall Services Inc., General Dake was the Senior Vice President for U.S. Government and International Military Programs at Bell Helicopter, Textron. That business unit, one of two profit centers at Bell Helicopter, had revenues in excess of $900 million."
James O. Ellis is a Director at the Lockheed Martin Corporation.
Ronald R. Fogleman "currently has a seat of Boards of Directors of Alliant Techsystems, AAR Corporation, Mesa Air Group, Inc., and World Air Holdings, Inc. Alliant Techsystems Inc., most commonly known by its ticker symbol, NYSE: ATK, is one of the largest aerospace and defense companies in the United States with more than 18,000 employees in 22 states, Puerto Rico and internationally, and 2010 revenues in excess of an estimated US$4.8 billion."
Tommy Franks... Well, he endorsed Bush in 2004. What more do you want?
Alfred G. Hansen was President and Chief Operating Officer of EMS Technologies, "a subsidiary of Honeywell International since August 22, 2011, was formerly an independent Atlanta-based company with approximately $290 million in annual sales revenue. EMS-T specializes in wireless, defense, and space communications systems. Among its products, it offers electronic counter-countermeasures for communications satellites, and airborne communications, for which it holds a 90% stake in military applications, such as Air Force One."
Thomas B. Hayward signed the infamous letter urging Obama not to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell.
Chuck Albert Horner co-wrote Every Man a Tiger with Tom Clancy, an absolutely horrid book. (Not in terms of bigotry, it simply is really poorly written.) That, for anyone, should be the final straw. :colbert:
So you would be critical of an ACORN endorsement but not critical of an endorsement like this? Why because they served in the military and are above their own self interests?
You are either a hypocrite or a fool (or both). Critical thinking obviously isn't your string suit.
You still don't have a leg to stand on, and while I respect my elders I most certainly believe their "endorsement" means jack shit. 100% of them are from a pre 9/11 time period, with old ways of thinking. Even in '99 when I was going through Basic they were telling me the military is smarter, leaner and a hell of a lot more deadly.
I'm career army and will tell you straight up we need a smaller more agile force to fight in the 21'st century. This is exactly why the Army at least has been transitioning the force for almost a decade now.
Cold war was a NON EVENT. Who cares about who "fought" in it.
Ha I came in just to ask how many of these people work or get paid from "contractors" that get Fed Money.
Most any star above 1 goes to work for a government contractor in one way or another
Those that died in it.
I respect their service to our country, but it's still fair to point out that
- They will benefit from Romney's plan for deficit-based spending increases, and in some cases from his tax policy.
- Most of them have been voting for Republican presidential candidates for decades.
This is similar to saying "500 union leaders endorse Obama". Of course they do.
to be fair, there are legitimate criticisms of the endorsements of such generals, but to call the Cold War a "non event," and to simply disparage what went on during those highly tense 4 decades of "pending doom," --the very real, very near misses, the deaths on both sides to keep the world from annihilating itself--is completely asinine.
I suggest the naysayers read up on much of the now declassified documents to come out of that era, and the type of espionage, negotiations, and countless "non-events" that no one outside of the upper echelons of government were ever aware of.
Let alone, the on-going civil rights violations--imprisonment, murder, torture, etc--of all the countries occupied, partly due to our unwillingness to pressure our Soviet Allies into backing down, thus earning a rather negative reputation as having abandoned many of these nations to a fate worse than death for so many decades.
LOL....pblabber gets owned on another one of his patented wall of text op-eds that he tries to pass of as fact.
So, that makes it like the hundredth time at least that this has happened?
Cold hard truth.
I'm going to go out on a limb and say Bill Boykin (and others like him) are on that list, so um, yeah...complete shock they wouldn't endorse a candidate not drinking the GOP Koolaid. Stunning.
hahahha, Nice Phokus.
A bunch of senile old coots really. It's all laid out plainly when you see someone endorsing a candidate with Sarah Palin as a running mate, lol.
This just in - people working in a field Romney promised 2 trillion dollars to endorse him. Shocking.
More importantly, what is the big deal about 500 retired military personnel endorsing a candidate? Does being in the military make them more knowledgeable of politics than any other American?
I respect these guys for their service to their country, but I'm also pretty sure half of these guys are crazy tea-party supporters just as well.
Ownage not found. Just like in the hundreds of other attempts that have been made. Lift your blinders and see the truth!
Fact is, Obama has literally a handful of endorsements from the senior military that have chosen to play in this arena, and those endorsements seem for reasons other than Obama's purported sense of foreign policy and defense "expertise."
Romney, having not even been the Commander-In-Chief, has vastly more endorsements. That is cold, hard fact.
Why would someone endorse?
Someone is in business, they know that if their man loses, they will too, and often very big bucks. So most businessmen play it safe, even give to both sides, go to both R and D dinners, etc.
The military guys tend to stay military, however. They cannot just leave behind the lives they led in service to the country. They are much less likely to make a cynical ploy as is argued above. They actually do love the country they devoted their lives to. This love sustains them now as it did when their lives were on the line.
If they are now in a senior position in business, all they have to do is be silent and watch the election play out. Neutral, uncommitted - that is the safe game to be played.
Now, a day before the election, a supposedly very close and uncertain election, these guys have risked their reputations and their livelihoods to endorse Romney.
The "progressives" and the lefties and the re-distributionists that post here despise the military and what it represents - the defense of a nation they do not understand and a nation that has rejected their false utopianism time and again. Those who spat on troops returning from every modern conflict have not changed their tune, have they?
So, as before, they attack the messengers and ignore the message.
Tomorrow we will see how many agree with the generals and the admirals and the business owners and the housewives and the millions who know that Romney is a much better choice for the next four years.
Until then, we might consider that the courage of those who have served continues on...