-
Re: Harkin v. Limbaugh
 Originally Posted by Cyclonepride First, a question.......what does Harkin stand for that gives him your support? Second, it only makes you a phony employee if you didn't even make it through the initial training, then go off and spout about the employer as if you know. My big thing is social issues, which is why I align with the Democratic party and Harkin. I would consider myself a conservative when it comes to government spending, but I also realize that taxes are needed to cover the basic necessities (police, fire, military, etc.), but for me the social issues are the my main focal points.
-
Re: Harkin v. Limbaugh
 Originally Posted by isufbcurt I vote for Harkin and will continue to do so. I could care less if his military record is exaggerrated, he was in the military during the war so thats all I need.
As far as Rush, he's a hipocrite plain and simple. Condemn the Moveon.org thing but then say soldiers that were actually over in Iraq are phony because they don't support the war, thats bs. Those soldiers were actually out there fighting, so they can be for or against the war if they want.
I don't agree with everything the company I work for does and I tell them, does that make me a phony employee? You have a very low standard of what you expect from our elected officials if being in the military is "all you need."
Although I hesitate to defend Rush, perhaps you should keep more abreast of the situation surrounding the "phony soldier" issue before forming your conclusions.
-
Re: Harkin v. Limbaugh
 Originally Posted by alaskaguy You have a very low standard of what you expect from our elected officials if being in the military is "all you need."
Although I hesitate to defend Rush, perhaps you should keep more abreast of the situation surrounding the "phony soldier" issue before forming your conclusions.
I didn't say being in the military is all i need to make myself vote for someone. I meant if the person is in the military, whether they are in a gun fight 5' from the enemy, or in the reserves at home in America they are still in the military so I am not gonna dispute their military record.
-
Re: Harkin v. Limbaugh
Tom Harkin was indeed a pilot during the Viet Nam War. And he served overseas. So he ferried damaged aircraft to Japan. Big Deal.
I find it more outrageous that our current President MISSED A URINE TEST to test for Drugs. A missed test means you are DIRTY with Drugs by the way. AND went AWOL from the National Guard. No records?? GHW Bush I was head of the CIA. Pretty easy to make bad things disappear.
-
Re: Harkin v. Limbaugh
 Originally Posted by isufbcurt I vote for Harkin and will continue to do so. I could care less if his military record is exaggerrated, he was in the military during the war so thats all I need.
As far as Rush, he's a hipocrite plain and simple. Condemn the Moveon.org thing but then say soldiers that were actually over in Iraq are phony because they don't support the war, thats bs. Those soldiers were actually out there fighting, so they can be for or against the war if they want.
I don't agree with everything the company I work for does and I tell them, does that make me a phony employee?
The guys whom Rush thinks are phony are the ones who never went over to Iraq or anywhere else for that matter.
-
Re: Harkin v. Limbaugh
 Originally Posted by Stormin No records?? Ummmm, obviously you haven't talked to Dan Rather.
“Science investigates; religion interprets. Science gives man knowledge, which is power; religion gives man wisdom, which is control. Science deals mainly with facts; religion deals mainly with values. The two are not rivals. They are complementary.”
Martin Luther King Jr. -
Re: Harkin v. Limbaugh
Tom was a Delta Sig at ISU.
That being said, he makes my skin crawl every time I see or hear from him. I've always thought of him as a white Al Sharpton, always pining to get on TV. I would expect some of this crap out of someone from California, but Tom is so out of touch with most of Iowa. Maybe that's why he lives in Maryland, and takes most of his campaign contributions from people in New York and Washington.
I'm still trying to figure out how his wife is on the regents, even though she lives in Maryland.
-
Re: Harkin v. Limbaugh
In 2002, Senator Harkin gave a nationally televised and controversial eulogy for Senator Paul Wellstone, a close ally in the Senate who perished in a plane crash 11 days before his potential re-election. In the eulogy, Harkin urged the crowd to “stand up for Paul" and talked about “passing on Paul's legacy” and to win the 2002 Senate election “For Paul” — statements that drew loud cheers and were interpreted by some as overt political references and inappropriate for a memorial service.[citation needed]
While running for his Senate seat in 1984, and again while running for the Democratic presidential nomination in 1992, Harkin has faced criticism for claiming that he had flown combat missions over North Vietnam. In a 1979 round table discussion with other Congressional Veterans, Harkin said of his service as a Navy pilot: “One year was in Vietnam. I was flying F-4s and F-8s on combat air patrols and photo-reconnaissance support missions”. These comments were later published in a 1981 book by David Broder. After subsequent inquiries by Barry Goldwater and The Wall Street Journal, Harkin clarified that that he had been stationed in Japan and sometimes flew recently repaired aircraft on test missions over Vietnam. His service flying F-4s and F-8s was later, while he was stationed in Cuba.[6] [7] References to this controversy were deleted from Wikipedia by staffers from Harkin's senate office.[1]
In June 2001, the Des Moines Register reported that Senator Harkin had “inadvertently omitted” $200,000 in Conoco stock owned by his wife Ruth and some $15,000 owned by their daughter Amy on his Senate financial statement.[citation needed]
-
Re: Harkin v. Limbaugh
one of my favorite quotes from Mr. Harkin:
paraphrasing: "all guns need to be placed on a barge and shipped out to the deepest part of the Atlantic and sunk"   
-keep.
The first and best victory is to conquer self; to be conquered by self is of all things most shameful and vile. - Plato
May you only need 39 acres to turn your rig around. - keep -
Re: Harkin v. Limbaugh
 Originally Posted by cycloneworld We really need someone outside of the political world with big-time $$$ to run. 1, that money will give him/her a legitimate shot. And 2, it will give people an option to get away from the "typical politician".
This is one reason I'm for Fred Thompson. Although he still has ties to politics, he is not embedded in it. Wasn't that the platform of Ross Perot in '92? I could use some help on this since I was in kindergarten, but I think he was something like that.
-
Re: Harkin v. Limbaugh
 Originally Posted by timc243 Wasn't that the platform of Ross Perot in '92? I could use some help on this since I was in kindergarten, but I think he was something like that. Good grief......I voted for Perot twice, and read two of his books, "Not for sale at any price" and "United we stand" or something like that. It's amazing my fingers don't crumble into dust as I am typing -
Re: Harkin v. Limbaugh
 Originally Posted by Stormin Tom Harkin was indeed a pilot during the Viet Nam War. And he served overseas. So he ferried damaged aircraft to Japan. Big Deal.
I find it more outrageous that our current President MISSED A URINE TEST to test for Drugs. A missed test means you are DIRTY with Drugs by the way. AND went AWOL from the National Guard. No records?? GHW Bush I was head of the CIA. Pretty easy to make bad things disappear. Your position seems to be that we need to introduce some prospective into the discussion. However, if you go down that road pretty soon the lowest common denominator becomes the standard for our politicians.
Instead I would raise the bar and submit that politicians should be held to a high ethical standard. In other words, when you find the character of a politician to be troubling, that should not exempt lesser ethical breaches by other politicians from condemnation.
Finally ethical lapses should be judged on their merits. People on this board tend to only charge those politicians that do not share their political beliefs with ethical misconduct.
-
Re: Harkin v. Limbaugh
herbiedoobie wrote:
I've been following closely the proliferation of "phoney soldiers" that the opponents of the Iraq War have been using to support their "case." I find it instructive that it is a continuation of the Dan Rather "The facts may be a lie, but the story is true" mantra....
I haven't been following this closely so I am ignorant. Please give us some names of soldiers who are "phony".
-
Re: Harkin v. Limbaugh
StLouisClone wrote:
The guys whom Rush thinks are phony are the ones who never went over to Iraq or anywhere else for that matter.
Would you say that a soldier who supports a war but refuses to volunteer to go to the combat zone or anywhere else near it is a phony? If so, any currently prominent politicians come to mind?
-
Re: Harkin v. Limbaugh
Rush is a big fat, drug using liar, but I don't hold that against him.
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules | | |
Bookmarks