Another attack from the left on McCains service

Jarod said:
Clearly Beers was attacking qualifications, not service. I agree it was weak, but an attack on McCain's service it was not!

Candy, if some guy spent the last 25 years isolated in a POW camp completly cut off from American culture, then he just got out of his POW camp and returned to the United States and somehow got his party's nomination for president... Would pointing out that he lacked the qualifications to be president because of that be an attack on the guys service?
Click to expand...

Precious... if you are suggesting that BECAUSE he was a POW that he is not qualified, then YES, you are attacking his service. You are saying that he could not have gained the leadership skills BECAUSE he was POW. You are basing your judgement (in your example) on the fact that he was a POW.

That is no different than that POW coming back and saying... I was a POW and thus should be President.

That is idiotic.

McCain touts his service, no question. But he does not and has not ever made the claim that because he was a POW he is somehow MORE qualified to be President.
 
Superfreak said:
Fine, take out the "all".... How do you figure that leadership qualities were better developed in those that were free vs. POW? Both situations call for leadership skills. Both situations called for tough decisions. Yes, they were not the exact same situations. But BOTH faced challenges and BOTH were forced to make tough decisions.

To suggest that one is better than the other is idiotic. It is just as dumb as saying... " I flew a plane and thus my command experience is better than those who were on the ground". Different? Sure. But one is not generically better than the other.
Click to expand...

He explained exactly what he was referring to. But you don't want to hear it:

"he did not experience the turmoil here or the challenges that were involved for those of us who served in Vietnam during the Vietnam war"
 
LadyT said:
First off, I'm ready to take a back seat and watch cypress spank your @$$ once again for the billionth time, however before I sit back and watch the cyber skewering......
Click to expand...

I can't decide which is the better nickname for supertool

Onceler's "Village Idiot": which comports with supertools ignorance, and absolute hackery.

Or, Jarod's "Supercandy", which comports more with superfreaks wierd, effeminate, and possibly homosexual profile.

"Idiot" certainly comports with supertool's absolute incompetence in judgement and politics. Has anyone been wrong more often (other than Dixie) in the realm of politics? The Iraq War, republican economic policy, global warming. It begs the question of what the f*ck he's even doing on a political message board.

His absolute hackery with respect to this thread is on full display. It's all part of the "Democrats do it to!" mentality that he clings to. Trying to equate the reasonable, and essentially correct statements of Clark and Beers, to the outright lies of the swiftboar liars. This is what republican hacks do. 1) They're almost always wrong on the major political issues of the day; 2) They try to divert from their incompetence with the "Democrats do it to!" baloney.

why don't you actually take a look at what was written IN ITS ENTIRETY and stop projecting your fauxrage into the conversation.
Click to expand...

Surely, you jest. Faux outrage, is Supercandy's 's bread and butter. If he's going to be wrong on all the republican issues he's supported for the last eight years, wandering around the board in a faux rage is pretty much all that's left.

It makes one really wonder how someone can be wrong so often, and still show their face on a political message board. Maybe some people get angry when they are wrong all the time. I'm not sure, it's a psychological question; I usually just fess up to being wrong.
 
Cypress said:
I can't decide which is the better nickname for supertool

Onceler's "Village Idiot": which comports with supertools ignorance, and absolute hackery.

Or, Jarod's "Supercandy", which comports more with superfreaks wierd, effeminate, and possibly homosexual profile.

"Idiot" certainly comports with supertool's absolute incompetence in judgement and politics. Has anyone been wrong more often (other than Dixie) in the realm of politics? The Iraq War, republican economic policy, global warming. It begs the question of what the f*ck he's even doing on a political message board.

His absolute hackery with respect to this thread is on full display. It's all part of the "Democrats do it to!" mentality that he clings to. Trying to equate the reasonable, and essentially correct statements of Clark and Beers, to the outright lies of the swiftboar liars. This is what republican hacks do. 1) They're almost always wrong on the major political issues of the day; 2) They try to divert from their incompetence with the "Democrats do it to!" baloney.



Surely, you jest. Faux outrage, is Supercandy's 's bread and butter. If he's going to be wrong on all the republican issues he's supported for the last eight years, wandering around the board in a faux rage is pretty much all that's left.

It makes one really wonder how someone can be wrong so often, and still show their face on a political message board. Maybe some people get angry when they are wrong all the time. I'm not sure, it's a psychological question; I usually just fess up to being wrong.
Click to expand...

I kind of like supertool.
 
It is clearly not an attack on his service, it is merely pointing out that his service did not give him the qualifications to be president.

I dont consider that an attack, now if you claim he did not serve honorably or that he did nto go a good job, or that he did not deserve the three purple harts he recieved... That would be attacking his service.
 
Last edited:
Jarod said:
It is clearly not an attack on his service, it is merely pointing out that his service did not give him the qualifications to be president.
Click to expand...

foaming fauxragers like to pretend it is so that they have something to rally against.
 
LadyT said:
He explained exactly what he was referring to. But you don't want to hear it:

"he did not experience the turmoil here or the challenges that were involved for those of us who served in Vietnam during the Vietnam war"
Click to expand...

AGAIN... both of those are false.... he did experience the turmoil at home via all the propaganda videos the Viet Cong showed over and over again to the POWs.

He may not have faced the SAME challenges, but to suggest that somehow the challenges faced by the FREE Vets somehow made them better qualified than the challenges faced by the POW is ridiculous. You cannot make a blanket statement like that. There were probably some on both sides that became great leaders due to the challenges they faced.

Beers is trying to say that the challenges of the POW somehow didn't measure up to the challenges in the field. Which again is bullshit to make the claim of one being harder/superior to the other.

and AGAIN.... McCain DID serve in Vietnam during the Vietnam war.
 
Superfreak said:
AGAIN... both of those are false.... he did experience the turmoil at home via all the propaganda videos the Viet Cong showed over and over again to the POWs.

He may not have faced the SAME challenges, but to suggest that somehow the challenges faced by the FREE Vets somehow made them better qualified than the challenges faced by the POW is ridiculous. You cannot make a blanket statement like that. There were probably some on both sides that became great leaders due to the challenges they faced.

Beers is trying to say that the challenges of the POW somehow didn't measure up to the challenges in the field. Which again is bullshit to make the claim of one being harder/superior to the other.

and AGAIN.... McCain DID serve in Vietnam during the Vietnam war.
Click to expand...

Again a weak attack on McCain's qualifications, not his service.
 
Jarod said:
Again a weak attack on McCain's qualifications, not his service.
Click to expand...

Again, the point you fail to comprehend precious is that there is a difference between saying....

"McCains service does not mean he is qualified to be President"

and

"McCains time as a POW sadly limits his national security abilities"

Again, the question no one will answer.... HOW does it limit his national security abilities?????????????????????
 
Superfreak said:
AGAIN... both of those are false.... he did experience the turmoil at home via all the propaganda videos the Viet Cong showed over and over again to the POWs.

He may not have faced the SAME challenges, but to suggest that somehow the challenges faced by the FREE Vets somehow made them better qualified than the challenges faced by the POW is ridiculous. You cannot make a blanket statement like that. There were probably some on both sides that became great leaders due to the challenges they faced.

Beers is trying to say that the challenges of the POW somehow didn't measure up to the challenges in the field. Which again is bullshit to make the claim of one being harder/superior to the other.

and AGAIN.... McCain DID serve in Vietnam during the Vietnam war.
Click to expand...

Look Dixie,

I can't bottomline this for you any more. No one is devaluing McCain's military experience. He's stating that because it was different than others with more leadership experience and more direct combat experience, that should be considered instead blindly assuming that because he was in POW camp and served, he's somehow qualified. Which is what republicans tend to do.
 
Superfreak said:
Again, the point you fail to comprehend precious is that there is a difference between saying....

"McCains service does not mean he is qualified to be President"

and

"McCains time as a POW sadly limits his national security abilities"

Again, the question no one will answer.... HOW does it limit his national security abilities?????????????????????
Click to expand...

You put in in quotes, so Id like to see where Beers said, "McCains time as a POW limits his national security abilities"

When you get desperate you start changing what people said, dont you?
 
Jarod said:
You put in in quotes, so Id like to see where Beers said, "McCains time as a POW limits his national security abilities"

When you get desperate you start changing what people said, dont you?
Click to expand...

ouch.
 
Jarod said:
You put in in quotes, so Id like to see where Beers said, "McCains time as a POW limits his national security abilities"

When you get desperate you start changing what people said, dont you?
Click to expand...

LMAO... I have posted his quotes ten times already in this thread. Read it.
 
Jarod said:
So you admit he never said...


"McCains time as a POW sadly limits his national security abilities"



You admit you misquoted him?
Click to expand...

It was a paraphrase of what he said you fucking tool. Again.... if you want to play grammar police, yes, I should have used ' instead of ". Idiot.

But that does not change the fact that he did indeed state that position. He did so using a greater number of words. Which you once again have shown a complete inability to comprhend. Which is why I shortened it for you. I thought it might help such a mental simpleton comprehend the point Beers was making. Clearly I should have simplified it even further.

Beers said 'POW bad leader'

There... does that help you .... I hope so, because I don't think I can simplify it for you any further.
 
Superfreak said:
It was a paraphrase of what he said you fucking tool. Again.... if you want to play grammar police, yes, I should have used ' instead of ". Idiot.

But that does not change the fact that he did indeed state that position. He did so using a greater number of words. Which you once again have shown a complete inability to comprhend. Which is why I shortened it for you. I thought it might help such a mental simpleton comprehend the point Beers was making. Clearly I should have simplified it even further.

Beers said 'POW bad leader'

There... does that help you .... I hope so, because I don't think I can simplify it for you any further.
Click to expand...


That is clearly, flat out, not what he said.
 
LadyT said:
I smell ownage.
Click to expand...

Thats nuthing new when it comes to SuperCandy, when it comes to him its like, well, like taking candy from a baby. I cant take much credit for it, but thanks for pointing it out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top