The State of the Democratic Party II

[The Rich Port]

Not to mention there's soldiers who just enjoy serving their country and feel that not fighting would disgrace themselves and their families.

For some soldiers it's just as fucking job. It's the only thing they know, the only thing they feel they're good at.

To judge them for following orders is pretty fucking cowardly. If there's anybody to be judging, it's their commanders and the President at the time.

They're the ones handing out the marching orders, they're the ones deciding policy,they're the ones who decide who is the enemy.

Besides, in war, PEOPLE DIE.

Merizoc is grasping at straws so hard to make this lady look bad for no good reason it's making my testicular tubes erect.

There are plenty of things to dump on Tammy Duckworth for (like the fact she has an IQ of about 50), but her military service is admirable.

Nobody holds it against Trump, so I doubt they're going to hold it against a Purple Heart recipient.

[The Sauganash Union]

They really weren't ever stand-up people. JFK and RFK were pretty good liberals, but that's about it. Ted Kennedy killed a woman. William Kennedy Smith raped a girl. Patrick Kennedy covered up a rape and was an alcoholic drug addict. JFK Jr. was a dumb prettyboy who killed his wife and sister when he wasn't even qualified to fly. Even the patriarch, Joe Kennedy Sr (probably a Nazi sympathizer), was a bootlegger and lobotomized his own daughter.

As is the case when a young, charismatic person dies young, they become larger than life, and a legend is built around them. There is a very stark difference between who the Kennedys are and what the people think they are.

If JFK spoke with a flat Midwestern accent and was fat and bald, nobody would've given a shit about him.

You have some points here. JFK wasn't a bad person, Bobby Kennedy, to the best of my historical knowledge, was as idealistic as they came.

Ted Kennedy, jesus christ, I won't even go there. As a Democrat, I'm supposed to love him, but what happened at Chappaquiddick and his reputation for being a heavy boozer and serial womanizer just shows that he was too entitled to ever recognize his personal wrongdoings. The Kennedys were, and remain a family of men and women born with a sense of entitlement. There were exceptions, but I think the Kennedy Dynasty and Kennedy "legacy" that millions cherish should die out.

I agree. To me, they're not really different from any other rich family of pompous twats and brats. Some are good, quite a few are bad, and the vast majority are mediocre. I just don't get the obsession with their family, when the two good ones have been dead for over 40 years.

I don't think having a particular last name should be a political qualification. This is something both parties have been guilty of.

[MERIZoC]

Back in 2004, the American populace was so deep in post 911 paranoia that many decent American men and women decided to go overseas and fight for what they thought was right. Clearly, it wasn't right, but many of these veterans came back injured, they came back traumatized, etc etc. And many of them, too, after the War realized how much of a mess and pointless endeavor it was. Same happened in regards to Vietnam vets, if we're being honest, many you talk to don't care to talk about what happened in the war, but would admit that it was a pointless war.

I don't think Duckworth should be President, but the issue I have with your position here is that you seem to think all veterans of the Iraq War were complicit in the tragedies of the war. Perhaps, in a sense, there is a degree of complicity with some people, but I would never go as far to condemn veterans of the war. On the contrary, those who served and came back, I think most of them should be treated with an amount of dignity and respect. But that's just me.

Not to mention there's soldiers who just enjoy serving their country and feel that not fighting would disgrace themselves and their families.

Yeah that's pretty fucked up.

For some soldiers it's just as fucking job. It's the only thing they know, the only thing they feel they're good at.

And that's just straight up evil.

To judge them for following orders is pretty fucking cowardly. If there's anybody to be judging, it's their commanders and the President at the time.

Oh belive me I judge them too. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Powell, etc should all be rotting in an Iraqi jail cell.

They're the ones handing out the marching orders, they're the ones deciding policy,they're the ones who decide who is the enemy.

Yes and the soldiers are the ones who make the conscious decision to obey said orders.

Besides, in war, PEOPLE DIE.

Yes, that's more or less what I'm getting at.

Merizoc is grasping at straws so hard to make this lady look bad for no good reason it's making my testicular tubes erect.

This is a weird characterization. I may be making a point you're uncomfortable with, but the premise is very simple—Iraq war was bad, therefore the people who carried it out are also bad.

[Senkaku]

JFK wasn't a bad person

I mean, womanizing prodigiously while you're married and have kids isn't usually an indication that you're an awesome guy...

And there's the pivot lol

What pivot?

If I drive you to someone's house so you can murder them am I not complicit?

And did she fly American troops to go commit war crimes and massacre Iraqi civilians? (If you have evidence of such, please, by all means, show it)

A more accurate analogy for what you're saying would be "any person who is a member of any organization that's done anything bad is automatically complicit in, aware of, and supportive of its worst excesses, and no good thing that they did with this organization or that this organization did can ever be considered." Which is ridiculous.

[MERIZoC]

JFK wasn't a bad person

I mean, womanizing prodigiously while you're married and have kids isn't usually an indication that you're an awesome guy...

What pivot?

If I drive you to someone's house so you can murder them am I not complicit?

And did she fly American troops to go commit war crimes and massacre Iraqi civilians? (If you have evidence of such, please, by all means, show it)

A more accurate analogy for what you're saying would be "any person who is a member of any organization that's done anything bad is automatically complicit in, aware of, and supportive of its worst excesses, and no good thing that they did with this organization or that this organization did can ever be considered." Which is ridiculous.

She flew helicopters, I'm going out on a limb and assuming they weren't for delivering toys to children.

[The Rich Port]

Not to mention there's soldiers who just enjoy serving their country and feel that not fighting would disgrace themselves and their families.

Yeah that's pretty fucked up.

For some soldiers it's just as fucking job. It's the only thing they know, the only thing they feel they're good at.

And that's just straight up evil.

To judge them for following orders is pretty fucking cowardly. If there's anybody to be judging, it's their commanders and the President at the time.

Oh belive me I judge them too. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Powell, etc should all be rotting in an Iraqi jail cell.

They're the ones handing out the marching orders, they're the ones deciding policy,they're the ones who decide who is the enemy.

Yes and the soldiers are the ones who make the conscious decision to obey said orders.

Besides, in war, PEOPLE DIE.

Yes, that's more or less what I'm getting at.

Merizoc is grasping at straws so hard to make this lady look bad for no good reason it's making my testicular tubes erect.

This is a weird characterization. I may be making a point you're uncomfortable with, but the premise is very simple—Iraq war was bad, therefore the people who carried it out are also bad.

Yeah, that's a fucking moronic assertion, is what I'm getting at.

You can't judge an entire military force for something that MIGHT have happened while they were conducting operations that MAY OR MAY NOT have been their fucking fault.

You have zero proof this woman was responsible for any actual war crimes. Your idiotic vendetta against her and against Iraqi war veterans is completely misguided, self-righteous, and misinformed.

[Senkaku]

I mean, womanizing prodigiously while you're married and have kids isn't usually an indication that you're an awesome guy...



And did she fly American troops to go commit war crimes and massacre Iraqi civilians? (If you have evidence of such, please, by all means, show it)

A more accurate analogy for what you're saying would be "any person who is a member of any organization that's done anything bad is automatically complicit in, aware of, and supportive of its worst excesses, and no good thing that they did with this organization or that this organization did can ever be considered." Which is ridiculous.

She flew helicopters, I'm going out on a limb and assuming they weren't for delivering toys to children.

I didn't suggest they were. I asked if you have any evidence she was involved in war crimes, including/especially the murder of Iraqi civilians. You appear not to, and are instead simply saying that by being a member of the armed services, she is automatically complicit in any and all war crimes or abuses it committed in the entire time during which she was a soldier.

[Jordkloden]

This is a weird characterization. I may be making a point you're uncomfortable with, but the premise is very simple—Iraq war was bad, therefore the people who carried it out are also bad.

Your opinion is that anyone involved in the Iraq War is bad. It would stand to reason that you would deem anyone involved in the Vietnam War bad as well. My grandfather was conscripted into the U.S. Army shortly after he turned 18. He was a demolition man and a tunnel rat, due to his actions, he either wired explosives that killed dozens, if not hundreds of NVA and/or VC, or he directly engaged them with a .45 while inside their tunnels. So I have a simple question, is my grandfather a murderer?

[Valrifell]

It's not racist to want women of color in office.

Based off her race and sex alone it definitely is.

If someone said that they want a white male as president just because said person is a white male, I’m pretty sure that you would rightly call them a racist

No, I'd call them arbitrary.

If they said they wanted a white male because white males are naturally superior leaders, then I'd call them racists.

I thought right-leaners were supposed to be more pedantic on the use of racism.

[Arlenton]

Wait did Duckworth support the Iraq War prior to invasion?

[The Rich Port]

This is a weird characterization. I may be making a point you're uncomfortable with, but the premise is very simple—Iraq war was bad, therefore the people who carried it out are also bad.

Your opinion is that anyone involved in the Iraq War is bad. It would stand to reason that you would deem anyone involved in the Vietnam War bad as well. My grandfather was conscripted into the U.S. Army shortly after he turned 18. He was a demolition man and a tunnel rat, due to his actions, he either wired explosives that killed dozens, if not hundreds of NVA and/or VC, or he directly engaged them with a .45 while inside their tunnels. So I have a simple question, is my grandfather a murderer?

To be fair, your grandfather was a conscript, all of the Iraqi war veterans were volunteers.

However, none of them get to pick their assignments, especially if they're deploying and 90% of the assignments are going to involve combat anyway. Being a conscientious objector is likely to get you bumped to a pathetic paying job that means you can't support yourself, your family, or your future. No chance at promotion, I would assume, either, unless it's in non-combat companies.

Of course, I assume Merizoc blames the non-combat companies for being parties to the alleged crimes that occur every single time a U.S. soldier deploys in a foreign country, apparently.

And, of course, he is going to conflate my not calling Iraqi war veterans horrible murderers with me supporting the war in it's entirety.

[Hakons]

Being behind some sensible ideas in regards to marijuana, civil liberties, and foreign policy. *shrugs.*

As I said, she isn't great, I wouldn't want her as Pres, hence why I say keep her in the House.

I would not trust the "civil liberties" credentials of the woman who for several years was in bed with Fox News types, condemning the president for not using that oh so great buzzword, "radical islamic terrorism". Her legislative record is proof enough of these authoritarian and islamophobic positions. Her foreign policy lies slightly to the worse end of Obama, and of course, her friendship with Indian fascists is completely alarming.

Oh no! Bipartisan legislation! Oh no! Legislation to protect religious minorities!

[Hakons]

Not to mention there's soldiers who just enjoy serving their country and feel that not fighting would disgrace themselves and their families.

Yeah that's pretty fucked up.

For some soldiers it's just as fucking job. It's the only thing they know, the only thing they feel they're good at.

And that's just straight up evil.

To judge them for following orders is pretty fucking cowardly. If there's anybody to be judging, it's their commanders and the President at the time.

Oh belive me I judge them too. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Powell, etc should all be rotting in an Iraqi jail cell.

They're the ones handing out the marching orders, they're the ones deciding policy,they're the ones who decide who is the enemy.

Yes and the soldiers are the ones who make the conscious decision to obey said orders.

Besides, in war, PEOPLE DIE.

Yes, that's more or less what I'm getting at.

Merizoc is grasping at straws so hard to make this lady look bad for no good reason it's making my testicular tubes erect.

This is a weird characterization. I may be making a point you're uncomfortable with, but the premise is very simple—Iraq war was bad, therefore the people who carried it out are also bad.

Quite an interesting position. American society, and every society really, would find this analysis extremely grotesque. Every society honors their soldiers. Fortunately, the armed forces have ensured that you can spout this depraved nonsense without retribution.

[Kramanica]

Well, the Nazis did outlaw guns for Jews.

Let's play a basic thought experiment. Which populace is easier to control? One that is armed or one that isn't armed?

For the Nazis? It didn't matter.

And why is that?

[The Rich Port]

Yeah that's pretty fucked up.


And that's just straight up evil.


Oh belive me I judge them too. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Powell, etc should all be rotting in an Iraqi jail cell.


Yes and the soldiers are the ones who make the conscious decision to obey said orders.


Yes, that's more or less what I'm getting at.


This is a weird characterization. I may be making a point you're uncomfortable with, but the premise is very simple—Iraq war was bad, therefore the people who carried it out are also bad.

Quite an interesting position. American society, and every society really, would find this analysis extremely grotesque. Every society honors their soldiers. Fortunately, the armed forces have ensured that you can spout this depraved nonsense without retribution.

I personally don't care for glorifying violence and fighting non-defensive wars. However, the fact of the matter is Afghanistan was a response to an attack by Al-Qaeda, who in turn were backed by the Taliban, who for years had their own dictatorial reign over Afghanistan.

The soldiers that fought in Afghanistan (a war I assume Merizoc agrees with) didn't get a choice if they fought that war (which I'm sure most of them agree was OK as well), and they didn't get a choice in fighting the Iraqi War (a war Merizoc disagrees with and most Americans disagree with). I wouldn't have minded the Iraqi War in it's entirety if the upper echelons didn't suffer both mission creep and moral creep as they forgot why we were fighting these wars in the first place.

They stopped being retaliatory, police and reconstructionary operations and started being colonization attempts.

[Arlenton]

Quite an interesting position. American society, and every society really, would find this analysis extremely grotesque. Every society honors their soldiers. Fortunately, the armed forces have ensured that you can spout this depraved nonsense without retribution.

I personally don't care for glorifying violence and fighting non-defensive wars. However, the fact of the matter is Afghanistan was a response to an attack by Al-Qaeda, who in turn were backed by the Taliban, who for years had their own dictatorial reign over Afghanistan.

The soldiers that fought in Afghanistan (a war I assume Merizoc agrees with) didn't get a choice if they fought that war (which I'm sure most of them agree was OK as well), and they didn't get a choice in fighting the Iraqi War (a war Merizoc disagrees with and most Americans disagree with). I wouldn't have minded the Iraqi War in it's entirety if the upper echelons didn't suffer both mission creep and moral creep as they forgot why we were fighting these wars in the first place.

They stopped being retaliatory, police and reconstructionary operations and started being colonization attempts.

Merizoc doesn't agree with the Afghanistan war. As crazy as it sounds...

[The Rich Port]

I personally don't care for glorifying violence and fighting non-defensive wars. However, the fact of the matter is Afghanistan was a response to an attack by Al-Qaeda, who in turn were backed by the Taliban, who for years had their own dictatorial reign over Afghanistan.

The soldiers that fought in Afghanistan (a war I assume Merizoc agrees with) didn't get a choice if they fought that war (which I'm sure most of them agree was OK as well), and they didn't get a choice in fighting the Iraqi War (a war Merizoc disagrees with and most Americans disagree with). I wouldn't have minded the Iraqi War in it's entirety if the upper echelons didn't suffer both mission creep and moral creep as they forgot why we were fighting these wars in the first place.

They stopped being retaliatory, police and reconstructionary operations and started being colonization attempts.

Merizoc doesn't agree with the Afghanistan war. As crazy as it sounds...

I don't agree with it 100% either, but it had far more just cause than Iraq ever could muster.

Although, yeah, I guess by his rhetoric I should have assumed he thinks all soldiers are murderers.

[Petrasylvania]

Nowhere in that page does it say she murdered civilians.

It talks about her work as an american soldier, which I can only presume is what you were asking a source for, since the part about American crimes in Iraq (including the invasion itself) is fairly well known.

What's your beef with this lady anyway? Did she run over your foot in her motorized wheelchair?

Well memed, but no, my beef with her is that she was a willing and unrepentant participant in evil, like almost every other American soldier at the time.

Missed the chance to scream "BABY KILLER" at Vietnam vets and spit on them?

[USS Monitor]

Being behind some sensible ideas in regards to marijuana, civil liberties, and foreign policy. *shrugs.*

As I said, she isn't great, I wouldn't want her as Pres, hence why I say keep her in the House.

I would not trust the "civil liberties" credentials of the woman who for several years was in bed with Fox News types, condemning the president for not using that oh so great buzzword, "radical islamic terrorism". Her legislative record is proof enough of these authoritarian and islamophobic positions. Her foreign policy lies slightly to the worse end of Obama, and of course, her friendship with Indian fascists is completely alarming.

She does have a problem with xenophobia.

A lot of the Sanders wing of the party was impressed with her unapologetically backing him when the rest of the party was busy kowtowing to Clinton, but they didn't stop to think about WHY she preferred Sanders. She backed Sanders because he was less gung-ho than Clinton about immigration, and Gabbard is a paranoid hack that thinks dem dirty furriners is out ta get us.

[USS Monitor]

Is Joe Kennedy III really the best Democrats can do?

Jesus.

I'm sure I've said this before, but apparently it needs to be reiterated: Just because someone exists does not mean they are the best Democrats can do.

[Arlenton]

Isn't Gabbard pretty much pro-Assad?

[USS Monitor]

I think the Iraq war was a complete disaster that caused the unnecessary deaths of untold hundreds of thousands. Mrs. Duckworth was a reserve who was deployed to Iraq. Did she make a mistake supporting the war? Yeah, probably. Did she murder civilians outside of the Iraqi forces we were fighting? Y'know, probably not.

So, in all seriousness, and I can't believe I have to clarify this, no I don't support the killing of Iraqi civilians.

Then why do you support someone who, if not killed civilians or soldiers trying to defend their home from destruction, then was certainly complicit in it, just like everyone else in the military? Someone who has shown, as far as I can tell, no regret over her actions, but instead has indicated the opposite, touting her "service" as a dig at Trump's draft-dodging, as though she should be commended in any way for her actions.

Given the way Trump tries to present himself as a tough guy, I think Duckworth was well justified taking a dig at him for his draft-dodging.

[USS Monitor]

Some of the Kennedys were stand up people, others were overall just spoiled brats from the start who felt they had a birthright to be in an elected office. Another key difference, the Kennedys are often idolized by many people, but not the Bushes.

They really weren't ever stand-up people. JFK and RFK were pretty good liberals, but that's about it. Ted Kennedy killed a woman. William Kennedy Smith raped a girl. Patrick Kennedy covered up a rape and was an alcoholic drug addict. JFK Jr. was a dumb prettyboy who killed his wife and sister when he wasn't even qualified to fly. Even the patriarch, Joe Kennedy Sr (probably a Nazi sympathizer), was a bootlegger and lobotomized his own daughter.

As is the case when a young, charismatic person dies young, they become larger than life, and a legend is built around them. There is a very stark difference between who the Kennedys are and what the people think they are.

If JFK spoke with a flat Midwestern accent and was fat and bald, nobody would've given a shit about him.

They are kind of overrated. Around the time I moved to Massachusetts, they were complaining about a proposal to build wind farms off the coast, saying it would ruin the view from their property, and I was like, "Why does that matter enough to be worth talking about, never mind enough to influence the state's decisions?" People act like the sun shines out their behinds just because they're the Kennedys and they have money.

[Bakery Hill]

Isn't Gabbard pretty much pro-Assad?

Yes.

[Bakery Hill]

I would not trust the "civil liberties" credentials of the woman who for several years was in bed with Fox News types, condemning the president for not using that oh so great buzzword, "radical islamic terrorism". Her legislative record is proof enough of these authoritarian and islamophobic positions. Her foreign policy lies slightly to the worse end of Obama, and of course, her friendship with Indian fascists is completely alarming.

She does have a problem with xenophobia.

A lot of the Sanders wing of the party was impressed with her unapologetically backing him when the rest of the party was busy kowtowing to Clinton, but they didn't stop to think about WHY she preferred Sanders. She backed Sanders because he was less gung-ho than Clinton about immigration, and Gabbard is a paranoid hack that thinks dem dirty furriners is out ta get us.

That's reducing the issues too much. She also backed Sanders because she seems to share a lot of Sanders' beliefs and has done so a while. You can be low key anti-Muslim as well as being anti-Wall Street, pro-choice, pro-medicare and an environmentalist, which is what she seems to be.