- Reaction score
- 5,514
- Points
- 1,060
Xactly.Couple blasphemous throwing up the devil's hand sign too.
![Winking face :wink: š](https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png)
Xactly.Couple blasphemous throwing up the devil's hand sign too.
He was invited to this occasion by the families. Your still assuming, but kindly show me my assumptions in this discussion. I certainly didn't assume honourable soldiers were clowns.As is yours.
Was he there last year or the year before? Right.
Donāt be daft. You know exactly what I said and what I meant. If this guy was a Republican youād be praising his service to the moon and beyond and ranting to anyone attacking it and you know it. The fact is that one side is attacking one manās service and the other is not (in Vanceās case). It all for political points. So far the MSGA crowd has done mostly personal attacks (even going so far as to attack his neuro divergent sonās reaction at the convention) and it isnāt really working. To the point where that sideās more āreasonableā types are begging them to stick to policy. Donāt get me wrong, I have no doubt the Dems are loving it from a political advantage point.So the guys that did deploy from his unit, including the CO and CSM are clowns? Talk about disrespecting and going after someone's service![]()
LCol John Kolb, Commander, who took Walz's unit to war.
LINK - Former leader of Tim Walzās unit joins stolen valor attacks: āAffrontā to claim rank āhe did not earnā
View attachment 87594
CSM Tom Behrends, Walz's replacement
Tim Walz a ācowardā and ātraitorā for retiring from military before Iraq, says Guardsman who replaced VP pick
LINK - MSN
Good on him. So an opportunist. Like I said, I hope it helped them. But this was a political move on his part. Nothing else.He was invited to this occasion by the families. Youāre still assuming, but kindly show me my assumptions in this discussion. I certainly didn't assume honourable soldiers were clowns.
Keeping the sacrifice of Warriors, that were needlessly murdered, in the minds of people is good enough for me. I don't care who set it up.
It was a unnecessary loss of life that was a direct result of the hamfisted, poorly executed surrender by the Biden administration.
Some people want things both waysā¦The post that I was responding to (in this thread that is about the presidential election campaign) was highlighting that Trump was attending a memorial ceremony while Biden and Harris were off politicking. It's one thing to denigrate the motives/actions of individuals for not recognizing the sacrifice of others by not attending a function, but it's a whole other matter when trying to assign that they have distain for that sacrifice when they haven't been invited to a private function.
No, I know you called Walz's detractors clowns. You made zero caveats.Donāt be daft. You know exactly what I said and what I meant. If this guy was a Republican youād be praising his service to the moon and beyond and ranting to anyone attacking it and you know it. The fact is that one side is attacking one manās service and the other is not (in Vanceās case). It all for political points. So far the MSGA crowd has done mostly personal attacks (even going so far as to attack his neuro divergent sonās reaction at the convention) and it isnāt really working. To the point where that sideās more āreasonableā types are begging them to stick to policy. Donāt get me wrong, I have no doubt the Dems are loving it from a political advantage point.
And nowhere did he claim there was stolen valour.
The 13 soldiers lost their lives as a direct result of the decisions made by Biden and Harris.The post that I was responding to (in this thread that is about the presidential election campaign) was highlighting that Trump was attending a memorial ceremony while Biden and Harris were off politicking. It's one thing to denigrate the motives/actions of individuals for not recognizing the sacrifice of others by not attending a function, but it's a whole other matter when trying to assign that they have distain for that sacrifice when they haven't been invited to a private function.
YesSome people want things both waysā¦
Well I'm glad you are more cognizant and better qualified to speak about Walz than his own CO and CSM. Two people that were intimately involved with the situation and able to address one of their soldiers performance, pitfalls and resulting repercussions.Good on him. So an opportunist. Like I said, I hope it helped them. But this was a political move on his part. Nothing else.
if they are attacking his service unfairly, they are. That isnāt an indictment of THEIR service. You might be ok with that. Iām not.
If you need me to explain it to you I certainly can.
Exactly. Clowns is not service dependent now is it?No, I know you called Walz's detractors clowns. You made zero caveats.
I can only go by what you have historically posted on these subjects.Do not pretend to know what I would or would not do. That's twice you've done it in as many days
None. Just like Walz. No grounds other than it being political.What grounds do they have to attack Vanceās service?
Yep. No argument there. Itās an easy umbrella to put on both sides. It seems to be working for the Dems though as they are trying to project positivity over negativity wit their renewed campaign. Polls are tightening up and being surpassed.Pot, kettle. All the dems have done are personal attacks. Nazis, KKK, White Supremists, Authoritarians, dictators, Trump ruined the border even claims that Vanceās family should be raped. The whole convention was an attack on Trump and the GOP.
Yes. Definitely a weakness in their campaign. But the GOP seems to not want to exploit that very much. I have some theories but canāt be 100# sure as to why.The dems have no policy except for what they've stolen from Trump. And Harris flip flopping on all the policies she ushered into law during her tour as VP.
And while some didnāt like him others did. We all know plenty of people that like or dislike people in command positions. Sounds like there may have been some friction in that command team?While LCol Kolb didn't use the exact phrase Stolen Valour, he made it pretty clear Walz's was a shitpump. CSM Behrends called it Stolen Valor.
please show me. I can wait.Yesyouthey do.
No you arenāt and no I am not. Glad you believe them. I donāt really care.Well I'm glad you are more cognizant and better qualified to speak about Walz than his own CO and CSM. Two people that were intimately involved with the situation and able to address one of their soldiers performance, pitfalls and resulting repercussions.
Where did I say you did? You said that I did, (knowing full well you were trolling btw) but I offered to explain it more clearly if youād like.How did I denigrate (indicte) their service? From what has been written, it wasn't me that called them clowns.
because you got it wrong. Offer still stands.Why would I need you to explain? You're in my head, you know what I'm thinking.
Thanks. Iām sure he was. He likely gets invited to a pile of stuff. Iām sure he saw the opportunity and made that calculation. Everything right now in the campaign is calculated. Itās no small coincidence that this is a bit of damage control over his CMH comments that heās still taking flak for.Opportunist. Pay attention, one last time. He was invited by the families. All he did was recognise their wishes. An opportunist would likely hear about the service and just show up.
maybe you might learn something,Itās fun to watch Remius: "Harris/Walz gooood! Trump/Vance baaaad!"
Yeah, you can't explain it away that easy. You said what you said.Exactly. Clowns is not service dependent now is it?
I can only go by what you have historically posted on these subjects.
None. Just like Walz. No grounds other than it being political.
Yep. No argument there. Itās an easy umbrella to put on both sides. It seems to be working for the Dems though as they are trying to project positivity over negativity wit their renewed campaign. Polls are tightening up and being surpassed.
Yes. Definitely a weakness in their campaign. But the GOP seems to not want to exploit that very much. I have some theories but canāt be 100# sure as to why.
And while some didnāt like him others did. We all know plenty of people that like or dislike people in command positions. Sounds like there may have been some friction in that command team?
Doesnāt change the fact that his service is being attacked. Personally I donāt think itās really working and is only showing a bit of desperation as Walzās approval ratings seem to be climbing. (5 points since the convention).
Some people want things both waysplease show me. I can wait.
maybe you might learn something,
Edit: LOL. I just realized you havenāt actually read what I wrote. Cancel my last.
Well, if you don't care, I wonāt waste anymore of my time.No you arenāt and no I am not. Glad you believe them. I donāt really care.
Yeah, I can. And I did, you choosing to convienantly ignore it is a YOU problem.Yeah, you can't explain it away that easy. You said what you said.
Yep. I stand by it. How about this, I stand by my guess?You made a definitive accusation. Once again, don't presume to know me. You can guess, but say it's a guess.
No itās a consensus, you donāt like the fact that I agree with your position on that. Itās not really an end of the discussion as much as really leaving you nowhere to go with your argument. Mostly because I agree. So there we are. Not much more to it. And I didnāt exactly say some people do and some , donāt. I suggest you read what I said. I was pretty clear.Some people do, some people don't, isn't an answer. It's an attempt to end the discussion.
Any campaign will do whatever damage control it can and correct anything that are mistakes. Iām sure you understand that no?If there is nothing to the accusations, why are they going around scrubbing and changing websites. Making statements about mispeaking. Why didn't his own statements match his service? What is it they are trying to correct/ bury? It was never important enough to do before, but now that the lies have come to light, hurting the campaign, they're trying to change them or brush them off.
of course. She actually didnāt get a bump. She pretty much stayed stable. He did though. By 5 points from before the DNC.She has a 5 point lead, depending who you ask, coming off the convention. It's pretty well within margin of error. It is a snapshot and means nothing. Especially two months out. Perhaps after 39 days she'll give an interview or answer a question and we can figure out where she stands. Or maybe she intends to campaign from Joe's basement.