(09-13-2012 09:38 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-13-2012 09:16 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(09-12-2012 06:09 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Did Mitt overlooking our troops in battle in his acceptance speech offend you?

Owl?

No, since I don't have any idea what you are talking about.

You said you were offended as a veteran at the image of the Russian ships, so I asked if it offended you that Mitt did not mention our troops at war in his acceptance speech.

So, which is worse, not mentioning them at all, or half-assing it?

(09-13-2012 10:26 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(09-13-2012 09:38 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-13-2012 09:16 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(09-12-2012 06:09 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Did Mitt overlooking our troops in battle in his acceptance speech offend you?

Owl?

No, since I don't have any idea what you are talking about.

You said you were offended as a veteran at the image of the Russian ships, so I asked if it offended you that Mitt did not mention our troops at war in his acceptance speech.

I read your post, I know what you wrote.

I didn't hear the speech. Did Mitt pay tribute to Russian troops, but not our own? I would certainly be offended if he had paid tribute to the Russian troops but not our own.

If not, I guess it would depend a bit on the context. If the entire speech focused on the economy, then mentioning the troops might well have been out of place. If the entire speech was about defense and foreign policy, as apparently was the context of the warship presentation, then obviously it would have been offensive not to mention the troops.

At the end of the day, are you saying that it was wrong for the democrats showed this, or are you saying that it was okay for Romney not to mention the troops (if in fact he did not mention the troops)? Or are you saying that I should be offended by anything that republicans do but by nothing that democrats do?

(09-13-2012 11:08 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-13-2012 10:26 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(09-13-2012 09:38 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-13-2012 09:16 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(09-12-2012 06:09 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Did Mitt overlooking our troops in battle in his acceptance speech offend you?

Owl?

No, since I don't have any idea what you are talking about.

You said you were offended as a veteran at the image of the Russian ships, so I asked if it offended you that Mitt did not mention our troops at war in his acceptance speech.

I read your post, I know what you wrote.

I didn't hear the speech. Did Mitt pay tribute to Russian troops, but not our own? I would certainly be offended if he had paid tribute to the Russian troops but not our own.

If not, I guess it would depend a bit on the context. If the entire speech focused on the economy, then mentioning the troops might well have been out of place. If the entire speech was about defense and foreign policy, as apparently was the context of the warship presentation, then obviously it would have been offensive not to mention the troops.

At the end of the day, are you saying that it was wrong for the democrats showed this, or are you saying that it was okay for Romney not to mention the troops (if in fact he did not mention the troops)? Or are you saying that I should be offended by anything that republicans do but by nothing that democrats do?

Well, he didn't pay a tribute to either. Of course, he wants to EXPAND the military and is is a neo-con so I can understand why he might want to avoid talking about the military personel after 10+ years of continuous war.

(09-13-2012 11:18 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(09-13-2012 11:08 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-13-2012 10:26 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(09-13-2012 09:38 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-13-2012 09:16 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Owl?

No, since I don't have any idea what you are talking about.

You said you were offended as a veteran at the image of the Russian ships, so I asked if it offended you that Mitt did not mention our troops at war in his acceptance speech.

I read your post, I know what you wrote.

I didn't hear the speech. Did Mitt pay tribute to Russian troops, but not our own? I would certainly be offended if he had paid tribute to the Russian troops but not our own.

If not, I guess it would depend a bit on the context. If the entire speech focused on the economy, then mentioning the troops might well have been out of place. If the entire speech was about defense and foreign policy, as apparently was the context of the warship presentation, then obviously it would have been offensive not to mention the troops.

At the end of the day, are you saying that it was wrong for the democrats showed this, or are you saying that it was okay for Romney not to mention the troops (if in fact he did not mention the troops)? Or are you saying that I should be offended by anything that republicans do but by nothing that democrats do?

Well, he didn't pay a tribute to either. Of course, he wants to EXPAND the military and is is a neo-con so I can understand why he might want to avoid talking about the military personel after 10+ years of continuous war.

Which has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand which is trying to pay tribute to veterans while displaying Russian ships in the background.

(09-13-2012 11:25 AM)bearcat65 Wrote:  

(09-13-2012 11:18 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(09-13-2012 11:08 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-13-2012 10:26 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(09-13-2012 09:38 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  No, since I don't have any idea what you are talking about.

You said you were offended as a veteran at the image of the Russian ships, so I asked if it offended you that Mitt did not mention our troops at war in his acceptance speech.

I read your post, I know what you wrote.

I didn't hear the speech. Did Mitt pay tribute to Russian troops, but not our own? I would certainly be offended if he had paid tribute to the Russian troops but not our own.

If not, I guess it would depend a bit on the context. If the entire speech focused on the economy, then mentioning the troops might well have been out of place. If the entire speech was about defense and foreign policy, as apparently was the context of the warship presentation, then obviously it would have been offensive not to mention the troops.

At the end of the day, are you saying that it was wrong for the democrats showed this, or are you saying that it was okay for Romney not to mention the troops (if in fact he did not mention the troops)? Or are you saying that I should be offended by anything that republicans do but by nothing that democrats do?

Well, he didn't pay a tribute to either. Of course, he wants to EXPAND the military and is is a neo-con so I can understand why he might want to avoid talking about the military personel after 10+ years of continuous war.

Which has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand which is trying to pay tribute to veterans while displaying Russian ships in the background.

I guess maybe it doesn't(just continuing the way the thread was headed) but I noticed how you conveniently avoided commenting.

Robert, do you have some insider information that the democrats and obama are actually communists, or is that just your personal opinion?

(09-13-2012 11:32 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(09-13-2012 11:25 AM)bearcat65 Wrote:  

(09-13-2012 11:18 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(09-13-2012 11:08 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-13-2012 10:26 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  You said you were offended as a veteran at the image of the Russian ships, so I asked if it offended you that Mitt did not mention our troops at war in his acceptance speech.

I read your post, I know what you wrote.

I didn't hear the speech. Did Mitt pay tribute to Russian troops, but not our own? I would certainly be offended if he had paid tribute to the Russian troops but not our own.

If not, I guess it would depend a bit on the context. If the entire speech focused on the economy, then mentioning the troops might well have been out of place. If the entire speech was about defense and foreign policy, as apparently was the context of the warship presentation, then obviously it would have been offensive not to mention the troops.

At the end of the day, are you saying that it was wrong for the democrats showed this, or are you saying that it was okay for Romney not to mention the troops (if in fact he did not mention the troops)? Or are you saying that I should be offended by anything that republicans do but by nothing that democrats do?

Well, he didn't pay a tribute to either. Of course, he wants to EXPAND the military and is is a neo-con so I can understand why he might want to avoid talking about the military personel after 10+ years of continuous war.

Which has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand which is trying to pay tribute to veterans while displaying Russian ships in the background.

I guess maybe it doesn't(just continuing the way the thread was headed) but I noticed how you conveniently avoided commenting.

Comment on what?

Obama will reside over a $1 trillion of Sequestration for the military and you libtards are questioning about Mitt overlooking our troops in battle in his RNC acceptance speech. Are you f'ucking for real?

Ninerfan1 Wrote:Embassies burning, economy in the tank, Iran pursuing nukes...and [this] is somehow breaking news?

(09-13-2012 12:31 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  Obama will reside over a $1 trillion of Sequestration for the military and you libtards are questioning about Mitt overlooking our troops in battle in his RNC acceptance speech. Are you f'ucking for real?

What exactly do you think this 1 trillion should be spent on? I thought you wanted to reduce the budget deficit?