• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Ted Nugent: I Might Run for President

Ted Nugent for first zombie president of America :lamo
 
I was merely affirming your assertion that the Reps would elect a draft dodger (actually, they seem to prefer them). Now I could also bore you with the distinguished service of those from the other side of the aisle, further confirming your assertion that the Dems don't like draft dodgers, but I will not.

I, for one, do not find it a big deal one way of the other. Except, if a candidate advocates for the sword, I want them to have had actual experience with the sword (a metaphor for understanding war in its fullest). There is nothing worse than a chickenhawk. Dick Cheney was the quintessential despicable chickenhawk and we are still paying the price (in dollars, reputation and diplomatic capital)

McCain was a good man and a good candidate. Other than his choice of running mate, which to me reflected very poor judgment, I would have found him an acceptable POTUS.

both parties have had war heroes like JFK, Hubert Humphrey and Bob Kerry on the democrat side and Joe Foss (MOH) and Jeremiah Denton and Bob Dole on the GOP.
 
I couldn't find where the Army says no officer shooters, still it is stupid to say taking a couple of years in service to the nation is stupid. One way of looking at it the Army would have paid for your lawyer training, I know a couple of JAGs who took that route, the Army more than likely would have loved to sponsor you in school and i do see where the ROTC can participate in the big army matches. Shooting at big military matches, getting your schooling paid for while you serve the nation in a pudknocker slot AND get to say, yeah I served- did you? Better coffee a millionaire's money can't buy.....

Oh and on the Kerry thing- the right wing loves to claim silly things like 'he turned his back on his fellow vets' please point to where he did that. I found 1971 testimony where he tells the stories FROM fellow vets but he didn't damn any one of them. he didn't drop a dime on any one, he didn't turn his back on his fellow vets but on the war.

There is a difference...

I didn't need the taxpayer to pay my law school fees but looking back it might have been a good move. Four years in the JAG corps was probably far better than 70 hour weeks at a big fourth street Cincinnati firm
 
both parties have had war heroes like JFK, Hubert Humphrey and Bob Kerry on the democrat side and Joe Foss (MOH) and Jeremiah Denton and Bob Dole on the GOP.

Yes, and the Republican party was once a party that actually had ideas and honorable men in service to the country, but I was not talking about the Republican party of 70 years ago, nor was I hardly discussing the previous generation of politician. If I say the Mets suck, I don't think telling me how they won the series in 1969 is germane. Sorry, but the discussion is about the current leadership.

John McCain notwithstanding, on balance, the Republican party are a bunch of chicken hawks. The Dems, on balance, are not as aggressive in advocating for military intervention, yet tend to have more vets amongst them. I have a problem with chicken hawks.
 
Last edited:
Yes, and the Republican party was once a party that actually had ideas, but I was not talking about the Republican party of 70 years ago, nor was I hardly discussing the previous generation of politician. If I say the Mets suck, I don't think telling me how they won the series in 1969 is germane. Sorry, but the discussion is about the current leadership.

John McCain notwithstanding, on balance, the Republican party are a bunch of chicken hawks. The Dems, on balance, are not as aggressive in advocating for military intervention, yet tend to have more vets amongst them. I have a problem with chicken hawks.

that is not true

even the dem senator from Va-former Reagan guy who went dem noted that 70% of the vets vote GOP
 
that is not true

even the dem senator from Va-former Reagan guy who went dem noted that 70% of the vets vote GOP

More specifically, I was discussing party leadership. I admit I corrupted the argument by ascribing an attribute to the "Republican Party"... but if you take it in context, I was discussing its elected leaders. Therefore, how vets vote is not relevant. That said, the national elected officials are not void of vets; the leaders are just short on that characteristic, which is a problem to me only in that they are so quick to want to use military force and spend lots of $$ on the military.
 
I didn't need the taxpayer to pay my law school fees but looking back it might have been a good move. Four years in the JAG corps was probably far better than 70 hour weeks at a big fourth street Cincinnati firm

I know you didn't need financial help, but it ain't about what the individual needs. And both beat 192 hour weeks in the Infantry! :lol:

But once again, the taxpayer isn't paying an individual's fees but paying for a citizen to be trained in a job to serve the nation. Some see the difference... :peace
 
I approve of Ted running...

I wouldn't vote for him... but it would be the most entertaining election season of all time.

It seems pretty hard to top the clown show of 2012.


republican-clowns-running-for-President-2012-esquire-mag1.jpg
 
Bush--both of them--served in the military.

No. Cheney did not. But like him, you revise history. (Sec of defense does not count)

When Cheney became eligible for the draft, during the Vietnam War, he applied for and received five draft deferments.[21][22] In 1989, The Washington Post writer George C. Wilson interviewed Cheney as the next Secretary of Defense; when asked about his deferments, Cheney reportedly said, "I had other priorities in the '60s than military service".[23] Cheney testified during his confirmation hearings in 1989 that he received deferments to finish a college career that lasted six years rather than four, owing to sub-par academic performance and the need to work to pay for his education. Initially, he was not called up because the Selective Service System was only taking older men. When he became eligible for the draft, he applied for four deferments in sequence. He applied for his fifth exemption on January 19, 1966, when his wife was about 10 weeks pregnant. He was granted 3-A status, the "hardship" exemption, which excluded men with children or dependent parents. In January 1967, Cheney turned 26 and was no longer eligible for the draft.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dick_Cheney
 
I know you didn't need financial help, but it ain't about what the individual needs. And both beat 192 hour weeks in the Infantry! :lol:

But once again, the taxpayer isn't paying an individual's fees but paying for a citizen to be trained in a job to serve the nation. Some see the difference... :peace

and only the blind think the military is the only way to serve the country. I will leave it at that
 
Why? It's not like he'll be considered by the GOP as a viable candidate.

Wasn't -- who's the guy with the hairpiece -- .. Donald Trump. Wasn't Donald Trump considered a viable candidate? And he is a big joke, too.
 
and only the blind think the military is the only way to serve the country. I will leave it at that

probably best you do just that, and perhaps drop the Kerry crap along with the 'left' should embrace all draft dodgers and deferment users.
 
probably best you do just that, and perhaps drop the Kerry crap along with the 'left' should embrace all draft dodgers and deferment users.

I really don't need you telling me what I need to do. You weren't even accurate in your claims as to what I suggested.
 
I really don't need you telling me what I need to do. You weren't even accurate in your claims as to what I suggested.

I am far more accurate in what you 'suggested' than you about Kerry. And it isn't that many 'conservatives' couldn't seem to hear the Call of Duty coming from any place but an X-box, no Sir, it is they try and smear liberals for the same poor hearing... ;)
 
Back
Top Bottom