Mitt Romney: My Kids Helping My Campaign Is The Same As Serving In Iraq

3:55 pm EST August 8th, 2007 | Uncategorized | 14 Comments

Flip flopping Mitt Romney is such a tool.

Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney on Wednesday defended his five sons’ decision not to enlist in the military, saying they’re showing their support for the country by “helping me get elected.”

Romney, who did not serve in Vietnam due to his Mormon missionary work and a high draft lottery number, was asked the question by an anti-war activist after a speech in which he called for “a surge of support” for U.S. forces in Iraq.

Topic:

Related Posts

«
»

14 Responses to “Mitt Romney: My Kids Helping My Campaign Is The Same As Serving In Iraq”

  1. Wilbur says:
    August 8, 2007 at 4:05 pm

    That’s okay. If they’re anything like their father I don’t _want_ Mitt’s sons serving in the military — or in any position of responsibility.

  2. cellulose says:
    August 8, 2007 at 4:14 pm

    I donated some money to a campaign.

    That should cover me.

  3. Graham says:
    August 8, 2007 at 5:24 pm

    They could always join the “101st Fighting Keyboarders”.

    That way they can fight them here instead of getting their ass shot off over there.

  4. Dugger says:
    August 8, 2007 at 8:35 pm

    Chelsea?

  5. Trenton says:
    August 8, 2007 at 9:04 pm

    Any of you brave souls ever fought in the military?

  6. SpiderJ says:
    August 8, 2007 at 11:00 pm

    I’m sorry, I missed the part where Hillary or Bill said that Chelsea’s non-military activities were the equal to soldiers serving the country in Iraq.

  7. C.S.Strowbridge says:
    August 9, 2007 at 7:11 am

    “Chelsea?”

    Hey Dugger, until you have something intelligent to add to the conversation, shut the fuck up.

  8. SixSigma says:
    August 9, 2007 at 9:52 am

    Wow. The absence the thought & logic shown here are simply amazing. If you get a chance, please read about strawmen & false dichotomies, it might help in positing philisophical points in the future.

    To the issue though – the question posed, “Why aren’t your childern serving” serves no purpose. It attempts to make some statement about the hypocritical nature of politicians, yet it doesn’t even succeed in that realm.

    If we as a society, minimize others’ opinions because they have or have not served in a conflict, you have by virtue of this decision made military members a higher status than ordinary citizens.

    From here I would ask – why are your opinions (or mine, or Clinton’s or Romney’s)less valid than soliders?

    Disclaimer: I don’t believe soliders opinions are more valid than anyone else’s; just pointing out where your logic leads.

  9. SpiderJ says:
    August 9, 2007 at 10:02 am

    The question is valid when posed to war hawks, because it becomes an issue of whether you’d still believe in the war if you had something truly precious to lose by allowing it to continue.

    And regardless, Mitt’s response is politically tone-deaf. There are a hundred better things he could have said besides “helping dad get elected is just as good as fighting in Iraq.”

  10. Dugger says:
    August 9, 2007 at 3:32 pm

    Ms Clinton voted for war. Bubba used the military a lot. Why isn’t/wasn’t Chelsea in uniform? Is it moral for Democrats to send young men and women to war and not have their own kids serve? (certified liberal logic applied)

  11. SpiderJ says:
    August 9, 2007 at 3:45 pm

    Hillary does have to answer for her war vote. No argument there.

    Again, though, I missed the part where she had the gall to imply that Chelsea was serving America by helping her get elected.

    Mitt’s boys aren’t serving America, they’re serving Mitt. He should have known better.

  12. Graham says:
    August 9, 2007 at 7:59 pm

    liberal logic applied

    Hey Dugger. You still keep hammering away at that word “liberal”, don’t you? You try to make it sound like it’s a real dirty word, don’t you? You and your wingnut buddies. It even kind of worked for a while.

    But it’s not working anymore. It’s a word to be proud of.

    So piss off.

  13. C.S.Strowbridge says:
    August 10, 2007 at 5:02 am

    “Ms Clinton voted for war. Bubba used the military a lot. Why isn’t/wasn’t Chelsea in uniform? Is it moral for Democrats to send young men and women to war and not have their own kids serve?”

    Hey Dugger, shut the fuck up. You are too stupid to join in when the adults are talking.

    You realize your side has been wrong about practically everything for the past seven years. If you had an ounce of intelligence you would realize you don’t know what you are talking about.

    But if you had an ounce of intelligence, you wouldn’t vote Republican.

    “(certified liberal logic applied)”

    This is more bullshit lies for the party that has nothing real to offer anyone.

  14. Dugger says:
    August 10, 2007 at 11:30 am

    Actually, Spider, Romney did not say his sons’ actions were equal – that is merely a snotty spin put on it by progressives. And the original question, from a self-styled progressive, was about his sons not serving in the military – as if that is a disqualifier for a pres to send troops in harms way.

    I don’t believe it is, but I believe that if the basic point of the question applies to Romney, it should apply to Ms. Clinton. And maybe Obama needs to pledge to the future military service commitment of his children.