dubyaD40.com

Today's Topics


Wednesday, August 8, 2007
"Surge of Support" for the troops, Romney style posted by Wally 10:08 AM While our troops are sweltering in 130 degree heat, wearing body armor and helmets, lugging heavy packs and weaponry all over the desert halfway around the world, Mitt Romney (R-MA) and his five military aged sons are serving the country in their own special way. The former Massachusetts governor said his sons were showing their support for the country by "helping get me elected." Romney, who did not serve in Vietnam due to his Mormon missionary work and a high draft lottery number, was posed the question by an anti-war activist after a speech in which Romney saluted a uniformed soldier in the crowd and called for donations to military support organizations. Romney's five sons range in age from 37 to 26 and have worked as real estate developers, sports marketers and advertising executives. They are now actively campaigning for their father and have a "Five Brothers" blog on Romney's campaign Web site. Romney noted that his middle son, 36-year-old Josh, was completing a recreational vehicle tour of all 99 Iowa counties on Wednesday and said, "I respect that and respect all those and the way they serve this great country." Give his kid a weapon, put him in a HumVee instead of an RV, and let him tour the provinces of Iraq instead of Iowa for a tour or three. Republicans Love War, for other people... Permalink :: 2 comments :: Post a Comment




	Given their lock step support of all of King Georgees war policies (as well as their history), I think it's unfair to lay this ALL on the doorstep of the Republican. Fact is I don't see any difference except the rhetorical bullshit coming out of the mouths of both parties. Do any of our elite ruling class have their children fighting an occupation they all support? Maybe there is, but I haven't heard of it. Is Hillary or Joe or Mr. Biden sending their kids to the recruiting office? Or how about Al's fuck up son? Given their total obedience I think it unfair and a bit slanted to lay this all at the feet of the Repugnicans. That's not to let them off the meat hook they deserve to be hanging from, but they're not making any pretence of listening to a mandate they were recently given. Because they weren't given one. The Dumbocrats are a different story. It seems Joe the Connecticut cocksucker is a reflection of the Democratic party, and the rest of the worthless bastards just let him take the heat they all deserve. We aren't going to change the Neos, they make that clear. It pisses me off a lot more that the pansies we trusted (oh was that ever a dumb move) are the ones really fucking us. In seven years they have yet to stand up for anything. The Neos don't want or need us, but to be shafted again and again and again by those pathalogical liars we put in office is the worse sin, in my not at all humble opinion. I can't see a dimes worth of difference between the two, except that the Pigublicans do what they say they'll do and the Dumfuckocrats bank on our stupid loyality to lie lie and lie some more, then vote Republican. posted by I can see clearly now at 1:51 AM


	I say we fire the whole lot of them and pick 456 random people off the street to replace them. They couldn't possibly do any worse for the country. posted by KBR at 10:18 AM