How many retired military people are there? > If there are 3,000 and only 300 chose to sign this, does that tell us something?

 

An endorsement like this is the same to me as the UAW endorsing Obama. We all know before an election and a candidate is even selected that the UAW is going to support the Dem. Likewise, the military is going to overwhelmingly support the Republican.

 

I do think there is power in this endorsement and maybe they selected today to announce it because it gives little time for it to be refuted. For example, Obama might be able to find 300 retired military people who will endorse him. Then you have zero impact. In fact, wouldn't it be somewhat funny if tomorrow there were an ad with 300 retired people endorsing Obama? Or maybe this is in response to the Powell endorsement as someone posted above. I am sure there is a reason why they did this today and the fact they did it today makes me look at it suspiciously.

 

JMO, but I'd say 300 admirals and generals endorsement would carry more weight than just 300 military people. :idunno:

This seems like an unprecedented endorsement in this scale. I'm just saying, I believe this is a very calculated and timely thing. I'm only guessing on their motives, perhaps FOX will discuss this or interview one of them tonight.

 

Regarding Libya, I would guess that the fact that patriots and civil servants were put in harms way without proper security or defense would offend most officers. This adminstration was taking a victory lap with pictures of the situation room the day after OBL was taken out. With Benghazi, it will be 8 weeks tomorrow, and still nothing but rhetoric, implausible denial, and potentially lies and cover-up from this administration. This truly sickens me, can you imagine how a military person would feel?

 

It sickens me that half of the story is trumped out like the WHOLE truth and people eat it up because it makes the guy they cannot stand look bad. More telling is Romney's silence on this issue. I'd love to know the WHOLE story and not the Fox News story.

JMO, but I'd say 300 admirals and generals endorsement would carry more weight than just 300 military people. :idunno:

 

Three weeks ago especially.

The military vote will carry Virginia for Romney. These types of things carry tremendous weight with them. Obama has already articulated an intent for defense closures at the shipyards in Newport News and the Democrats there are not happy about it.

 

Keep on underestimating the impact of military endorsement, see what it gets.

 

As of two hours ago Obama is still projected to take Virginia.

I'm interested in what made all these military retirees support Romney. Has he served in the military?

 

I am as well. Especially since he pretty much agreed with everything Obama has done regarding foreign policy. Would have loved to have known 3 weeks ago.

How many retired military people are there? > If there are 3,000 and only 300 chose to sign this, does that tell us something?

 

An endorsement like this is the same to me as the UAW endorsing Obama. We all know before an election and a candidate is even selected that the UAW is going to support the Dem. Likewise, the military is going to overwhelmingly support the Republican.

 

I do think there is power in this endorsement and maybe they selected today to announce it because it gives little time for it to be refuted. For example, Obama might be able to find 300 retired military people who will endorse him. Then you have zero impact. In fact, wouldn't it be somewhat funny if tomorrow there were an ad with 300 retired people endorsing Obama? Or maybe this is in response to the Powell endorsement as someone posted above. I am sure there is a reason why they did this today and the fact they did it today makes me look at it suspiciously.

 

Doesn't pass the smell test and nowadays anyone who questions the military is unpatriotic.

It sickens me that half of the story is trumped out like the WHOLE truth and people eat it up because it makes the guy they cannot stand look bad. More telling is Romney's silence on this issue. I'd love to know the WHOLE story and not the Fox News story.

 

What is the whole story? How are we supposed to know any other story than Fox's when ABC, CBS, and NBC are ignoring the story? Is there another side to the story? I feel pretty certain that the two ex Seals were killed 7 hours after the initial attack in a building different from the initial attack after asking for help multiple times. Is that wrong?

What is the whole story? How are we supposed to know any other story than Fox's when ABC, CBS, and NBC are ignoring the story? Is there another side to the story? I feel pretty certain that the two ex Seals were killed 7 hours after the initial attack in a building different from the initial attack after asking for help multiple times. Is that wrong?

 

Believe half of what you see and nothing that you hear.

 

The only thing I am certain of is that two former Seals lost their lives. The details surrounding that vary and tend to change depending on who you want to believe.

Believe half of what you see and nothing that you hear.

 

The only thing I am certain of is that two former Seals lost their lives. The details surrounding that vary and tend to change depending on who you want to believe.

 

But the White House is not giving us the story and the media isn't searching for it except for Fox News. Why is that?

How many retired military people are there? > If there are 3,000 and only 300 chose to sign this, does that tell us something?

 

An endorsement like this is the same to me as the UAW endorsing Obama. We all know before an election and a candidate is even selected that the UAW is going to support the Dem. Likewise, the military is going to overwhelmingly support the Republican.

 

I do think there is power in this endorsement and maybe they selected today to announce it because it gives little time for it to be refuted. For example, Obama might be able to find 300 retired military people who will endorse him. Then you have zero impact. In fact, wouldn't it be somewhat funny if tomorrow there were an ad with 300 retired people endorsing Obama? Or maybe this is in response to the Powell endorsement as someone posted above. I am sure there is a reason why they did this today and the fact they did it today makes me look at it suspiciously.

 

Did you really just compare our military to the union? Really???

 

:madman:

 

Did you really just compare our military to the union? Really???

 

I just gathered that he was saying both groups have a predilection for endorsing a certain party. :idunno:

I just gathered that he was saying both groups have a predilection for endorsing a certain party. :idunno:

 

Yea,:idunno:

 

Doesn't cut it with me. No comparison.

But the White House is not giving us the story and the media isn't searching for it except for Fox News. Why is that?

 

IMO, the same reason Fox News searched for the birth certificate and no one else did.

Did you really just compare our military to the union? Really???

 

:madman:

 

FKYW nailed it. Unions vote D. Military people vote R. Strictly a comparison of voting habits. If that is a comparison that bothers you, sorry.

What is the whole story? How are we supposed to know any other story than Fox's when ABC, CBS, and NBC are ignoring the story? Is there another side to the story? I feel pretty certain that the two ex Seals were killed 7 hours after the initial attack in a building different from the initial attack after asking for help multiple times. Is that wrong?

 

WSJ said that help was dispatched from Tripoli. It was delayed by Libyan officials who insisted they take a larger Libyan force which took a long time to assemble. Once they landed, WSJ says the team had to "negotiate" transportation to Benghazi. By the time the force landed the ambassador was no longer there so the security forces went to the hospital based on reports the ambassador had been taken there.

 

So the right-leaning WSJ says security was dispatched by the US and arrived after delays from Libyan govt at 1:00 a.m.