Democrats go against one of their own "fighting Dems".
"For me, this is a second betrayal," Hackett said. "First, my government misused and mismanaged the military in Iraq, and now my own party is afraid to support candidates like me."
source
Can we change the thread to title to reflect this change? Maybe keep a countdown timer somewhere...
McGentrix wrote:Can we change the thread to title to reflect this change? Maybe keep a countdown timer somewhere...
We need to keep a running total.
So 57 has been reduced to , what, 50?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Veteran's politican action committee 'outraged' on Hackett pullout
RAW STORY
Published: February 14, 2006
#
JON SOLTZ, a 28-year old combat Veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom and Executive Director of the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America Political Action Committee (IAVA PAC), released the following statement upon news that Iraq Veteran Paul Hackett was leaving the Senate race in Ohio, due to internal pressure from the Democratic Party.
"It is an outrage that the Democratic Party has forced Paul Hackett out of the race for U.S. Senate. Hackett brought credibility on the number one issue facing the nation - the war in Iraq. The Democratic Party loses credibility on that issue because he is no longer running, and because they had a hand in his decision.
"The good news is that there are still a number of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans running for office around the nation. We are committed to getting these patriots the early institutional support they need, because it is becoming abundantly clear that the party leadership has no interest in them."
Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America PAC (http://www.iavapac.org/) is the only political action committee led by a Veteran of the war in Iraq, exclusively benefiting those Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans running for public office, and holding public officials accountable for their actions that affect the Troops and Veterans.
A rather clumsy mis-step by the Democratic leadership. In all likelihood Hackett was encouraged to run when it looked like DeWine would have no trouble in being reelected. But the continuing self-destruction of the Ohio Republican party and the newly vulnerable position of DeWine caused Schumer and Reid to reconsider. Of course, it's disingenuous of the top Democratic leaders to say that Sherrod Brown is a better fundraiser when it appears that they have sabotaged Hackett's fundraising efforts, but I suppose it gives an insight into how the party will eventually manage to lose in Ohio in November.
Cycloptichorn wrote:Quote:the current policies of the current crop of democrats have been rejected by the voters in the last 2 elections.
Not by much. And the Republicans are doing everything they can to cut their slim leads in national elections down to nothing.
Cycloptichorn
The Democrats won the national election in 2000.
No, Gore won the popular vote. Great for class president, not so great in a Representative Republic where electoral votes elect the president.
McGentrix wrote:No, Gore won the popular vote. Great for class president, not so great in a Representative Republic where electoral votes elect the president.
I doubt "it" understand that.
Foreign policy.
Can one of you republican camp followers tell me what and how successful the administrations foreign policy is and has been other than to alienate every foreign government and most of the worlds population turning them against the US.
As for the political persuasion of our military it remians to be seen how loyal they will be to the republican candidates after the repeated tours of duty in Iraq. Particulary from reserve and national guard outfits.
The context of the conversation was popular vote. The fact that the Republicans stole Florida is meaningless in this context. The delusional here are trying to make the case that the irrational viewpoint fueled by the dominionists is in some way a majority view. In reality, nothing could be further from the truth. What we have is unprecedented however, a loud lunatic fringe of about 20% who engage in irrational thought based on fear, hate and barbaric religious beliefs.
Why is it we can always count on McGentrix for a totally irrrelevant post?
McGentrix wrote:No, Gore won the popular vote. Great for class president, not so great in a Representative Republic where electoral votes elect the president.
Hey, McG!!! The facts, the absolute truth is now deemed irrelevant!
A fundamental understanding of English might help. Irrelevancy has nothing to do with whether or not something is a fact or not. Little wonder that the sheeple are so easily fooled when they can't even grasp simple concepts.
woiyo wrote:au1929 wrote:Foreign policy.
Can one of you republican camp followers tell me what and how successful the administrations foreign policy is and has been other than to alienate every foreign government and most of the worlds population turning them against the US.
As for the political persuasion of our military it remians to be seen how loyal they will be to the republican candidates after the repeated tours of duty in Iraq. Particulary from reserve and national guard outfits.
Every Foreign Govt??
Is that the only response you can make of in response to my post. Yesyour are correct not everyone. There are a few that are still our allies. But only one that agrees with the US foreign policy and that being Briton.
Australia, Isreal, Afganistan, Japan, S. Korea, Ck. republic, Poland, Slovakia.... Oh whats the point.
With regard to the military, the same things were said after Viet Nam and guess what, those who said it then were wrong then and the same will happen tomorrow, your opinion will be wrong.
Poland!!!! You forgot Poland! And Slovakia!!! LOL
Irrelevance is one thing; starting a thread with an untruth is another. Here is the article that probably generated the initial "fact". Even cursory readers will note that 56 democrats are running for congress vs. 39 republicans.
http://www.cqpolitics.com/2006/02/military_veteran_candidates_in.html
Who are veterans, that is.
Still not clear on why this thread went on for a week without the original premise being questioned. Perhaps more of you should get computers so you can "google" the "internet".
Paull, I checked it out after my first post on this thread witch is the first one after the title post. I think I count 6 dem Iraqi vets running for Congress.
