2024

[cradleandshoot]

I would not call it Stolen Valor.

But Trump's choice for VP would (isn't that a big surprise) and all of the Trump peeps will swallow the slander hook, line and sinker.

Notice he doesn’t object to the guy making the claim. It’s subtle and consistent. It’s what he and people like him do.

People like him served their country with honor and dignity before you were chitting yellow in your diapers.

"people like him" also were or became dishonorable during and after their service time.
It ain't the service that makes one honorable, though the service itself deserves respect.

Bootlicking becomes no one.

Not people like Old Salt. What makes you think anything pre or post career was ever dishonorable? The fact he takes you out behind the woodshed and spanks you on a daily basis must just eat at you? You can keep trying but those blisters on your fanny will keep getting bigger.

[old salt]

The guy making the claim served in Iraq. He earned the right to make the claim.

[MDlaxfan76]

Nice that you’re working overtime to disparage another serviceman. Such a surprise.

I'm surprised by what's coming to light & the MSM isn't ferreting it out.
I was working overtime to dig up factual evidence that defended Walz. I gave him every benefit of the doubt.
I admired his story & was looking to validate it. He didn't need to embellish it. He apparently served admirably.
Looks like I may have gotten out over my skis. His campaign press kit ? I can't believe Holder missed that or thought they could deny it.
obtw -- after you serve two years, your pension increases 2,5%/yr. It dovetails nicely with a career as a school teacher or member of Congress or state legislator.

Sorry, but you really are completely full of sh*t. And you know it, and everyone here knows you know it.

The benefit of the doubt would be simply to credit the fact that he served for 24 years, rather than getting on the subjective swift boat train that you have boarded. Will you be talking about Trump's service? About his relentless lying and gaslighting to work his way into becoming the Commander-in-Chief of folks like Walz? About his debasing treatment of women and people of color in the course of his lifetime? About his mockery of veterans? About his mockery of disabled people? About his blindingly obvious diminished and diminishing mental acuity? About his astonishingly demented "press conference" yesterday?

“And don’t forget they sell hats.”

Big difference between Kerry & Walz. Unlike Swift boats, no combat duty involved, no fabrications or exaggerations to earn combat awards. Walz served admirably.

Trump's non-service is irrelevant, unless you include everyone of his generation who was 4F or used a student deferment.

Vance has never implied that he saw combat. He did deploy to a war zone & was at risk as a result. He does not brag about his weapons training or that he carried a rifle when embedded & operating "outside the wire"...even though Every Marine is a rifleman.

Walz is a master communicator. That's why he's a VP candidate. As a HS social studies teacher, HS FB Coach, & a Master Sergeant (E-8) functioning as a Command Sergeant Major (E-9 assignment) he knows how to explain his service in a way that can't be misconstrued that he saw combat duty, deployed to Afghanistan, or was not aware of his unit's coming deployment to Iraq when he elected to retire.
I would not call it Stolen Valor.

I don't think Vance's service should be sneezed at, but I do think his attack on someone else's service is reprehensible as well as dishonest. He's pretending that his service gives him that right, but to my mind it makes it all the more reprehensible.

I'd remind you (who I believe knows) and anyone else that military service, including National Guard training, involves much more risk than the general public. Many more accidents as well as being a target for bad folks. Many more. You certainly need not be in a combat zone to be "at risk as a result". Certainly being IN a combat zone, even if not in combat duty, does involve being closer to MORE bad guys, so higher risk in that. That said, are we claiming that Vance chose to go to a combat zone? Not a chance...he DID decide to go into service, ala many others who saw such service as a way to go forward in their lives. He's successfully 4 years of service quite well. Good on him.

But Walz's regular duties in the NG likely put him at considerably more risk of accident than did Vance's role. We know that his hearing suffered.

Walz's duty also certainly involved weapons proficiency in a wide range of weapons, quite likely much more than Vance's service (which of course also involved 'rifleman' training). 24 years of service. Good on him.

But comparison should be totally irrelevant, both involved decisions to be at more risk than the general public, in service. Good on them.

But reprehensibly attacking someone's service, false claims of Stolen Valor...this tells you the very low character of the attacker. And should be called out unequivocally by anyone who knows better.

Salty, I think you're avoiding the Trump bone spurs lies because you know how awful they are. No one is saying on here that choosing not to serve is a horrible choice, even in a time or war and draft avoiding being called to combat service - though people can reasonably differ as to what's appropriate, but the lying about it is 100% revealing of character.

AND the hypocrisy is off the charts with these attacks on Walz's actual service.

I think you underestimate the hazard in Vance's service. He was based at Al-Asad in Anbar province which is still under attack. He embedded in civil affairs team which went into Iraqi villiages. Unlike Walz, he carried an assault rifle in a war zone, was exposed to IEDs & snipers, & earned hazardous duty pay.
Walz's service was commendable, but he never faced the risks that Vance did on deployment.
Corporal Vance did not have the option to volunteer for his assignment. He went where his unit deployed & did his assigned tasks.

Exactly...he did not volunteer for that service, so we have no idea whether he'd have done so. And I'm clearly NOT in any way suggesting there wasn't risk, nor do I "underestimate" it. See bolded red. Funny how you so easily ignore what I actually say.

Yup, he certainly had increased risk being in country...but he rightfully says (or admits) he was never under fire, never had an IED go off near him, etc. Let's give him credit for not lying about it. Higher risk in country, sure, but let's not suggest that he was a warrior actually in direct combat, either. He doesn't make that claim, which is appropriate, so let's not imbue him with some sort of great valor simply because he volunteered for service with a 4 year commitment and then was sent there in a job the military wanted done.

My point was to remind you and everyone else that simply doing military training involves much higher risk than the general public (albeit there are other risky jobs). Walz spent 24 years regularly in such higher risk, in service to his country. His hearing suffered. He certainly could have bailed way, way sooner and no one would have criticized that. But he re-upped after 9-11.

Again, the hypocrisy is off the charts. Disgusting.

[njbill]

And then there is Trump‘s evidently false claim that he was in a near helicopter crash with Willie Brown. Brown denies it. Trump apparently mixed up Willie Brown with Jerry Brown. Probably the first time that ever happened. Jerry Brown says he was in a helicopter with Trump, but it never had a hard landing or anything of the sort.

Maybe Trump is confusing his helicopter rides with Jeffrey Epstein.

[Kismet]

The guy making the claim served in Iraq. He earned the right to make the claim.

Serving in a war zone doesn't earn you the right to criticize a fellow soldier for something you yourself didn't see or witness.

Come to think of it, that applies to YOU as well. As usual, after talking about taking the high road you opted, as always for the low road. Thus reverting to your usual mean.

Someday perhaps you will learn when to just STFU as ggait has already suggested.

But that would require you to stop trolling here.

Only 15 out of 46 Presidents served in a war zone during their military service - that's 32%

[MDlaxfan76]

I would not call it Stolen Valor.

But Trump's choice for VP would (isn't that a big surprise) and all of the Trump peeps will swallow the slander hook, line and sinker.

Notice he doesn’t object to the guy making the claim. It’s subtle and consistent. It’s what he and people like him do.

People like him served their country with honor and dignity before you were chitting yellow in your diapers.

"people like him" also were or became dishonorable during and after their service time.
It ain't the service that makes one honorable, though the service itself deserves respect.

Bootlicking becomes no one.

Not people like Old Salt. What makes you think anything pre or post career was ever dishonorable? The fact he takes you out behind the woodshed and spanks you on a daily basis must just eat at you? You can keep trying but those blisters on your fanny will keep getting bigger.

I wasn't speaking specifically about Salty, I was referring to "people like him".

Flynn, who Salty promoted so hard on LP and FL, is a prime example, though Flynn actually served in heavy combat, which I don't think Salty claims he did. There are, unfortunately, but not surprisingly as people are complex and can go astray, many "people like him" who prove to be dishonorable.

But if we are going to talk about posters, my point is that supporting reprehensibly dishonorable people is its own form of dishonor.

bootlicking was referring specifically to you.

[cradleandshoot]

I would not call it Stolen Valor.

But Trump's choice for VP would (isn't that a big surprise) and all of the Trump peeps will swallow the slander hook, line and sinker.

Notice he doesn’t object to the guy making the claim. It’s subtle and consistent. It’s what he and people like him do.

People like him served their country with honor and dignity before you were chitting yellow in your diapers.

"people like him" also were or became dishonorable during and after their service time.
It ain't the service that makes one honorable, though the service itself deserves respect.

Bootlicking becomes no one.

Not people like Old Salt. What makes you think anything pre or post career was ever dishonorable? The fact he takes you out behind the woodshed and spanks you on a daily basis must just eat at you? You can keep trying but those blisters on your fanny will keep getting bigger.

I wasn't speaking specifically about Salty, I was referring to "people like him".

Flynn, who Salty promoted so hard on LP and FL, is a prime example, though Flynn actually served in heavy combat, which I don't think Salty claims he did. There are, unfortunately, but not surprisingly as people are complex and can go astray, many "people like him" who prove to be dishonorable.

But if we are going to talk about posters, my point is that supporting reprehensibly dishonorable people is its own form of dishonor.

bootlicking was referring specifically to you.

Boot licking wouldn't have worked on a pair of spit shined Corcorans. Your tongue would slide off so fast you'd hurt yourself. Before Flynn took a nose dive off the top of the crazy tree his efforts at counter insurgency in Afghanistan saved the lives of countless members of our military. His techniques and tactics have been widely credited with being nothing short of brilliant. None of that matters in the big scheme of things.

[old salt]

The guy making the claim served in Iraq. He earned the right to make the claim.

Serving in a war zone doesn't earn you the right to criticize a fellow soldier for something you yourself didn't see or witness.

Come to think of it, that applies to YOU as well. As usual, after talking about taking the high road you opted, as always for the low road. Thus reverting to your usual mean.

Someday perhaps you will learn when to just STFU as ggait has already suggested.

But that would require you to stop trolling here.

Only 15 out of 46 Presidents served in a war zone during their military service - that's 32%

I'm not criticizing Walz for not serving in a war zone. I'm criticizing him for giving the impression that he did, like your senior Senator from CT.

[Kismet]

The guy making the claim served in Iraq. He earned the right to make the claim.

Serving in a war zone doesn't earn you the right to criticize a fellow soldier for something you yourself didn't see or witness.

Come to think of it, that applies to YOU as well. As usual, after talking about taking the high road you opted, as always for the low road. Thus reverting to your usual mean.

Someday perhaps you will learn when to just STFU as ggait has already suggested.

But that would require you to stop trolling here.

Only 15 out of 46 Presidents served in a war zone during their military service - that's 32%

I'm not criticizing Walz for not serving in a war zone. I'm criticizing him for giving the impression that he did, like your senior Senator from CT.

Nice diversion. Neither you nor JDoucebag Vance know the actual facts. You both should stop talking like you do.

[old salt]

The guy making the claim served in Iraq. He earned the right to make the claim.

Serving in a war zone doesn't earn you the right to criticize a fellow soldier for something you yourself didn't see or witness.

Come to think of it, that applies to YOU as well. As usual, after talking about taking the high road you opted, as always for the low road. Thus reverting to your usual mean.

Someday perhaps you will learn when to just STFU as ggait has already suggested.

But that would require you to stop trolling here.

Only 15 out of 46 Presidents served in a war zone during their military service - that's 32%

I'm not criticizing Walz for not serving in a war zone. I'm criticizing him for giving the impression that he did, like your senior Senator from CT.

Nice diversion. Neither you nor JDoucebag Vance know the actual facts. You both should stop talking like you do.

Walz has told us the facts. His current campaign has corrected their website.

[Typical Lax Dad]

The guy making the claim served in Iraq. He earned the right to make the claim.

Serving in a war zone doesn't earn you the right to criticize a fellow soldier for something you yourself didn't see or witness.

Come to think of it, that applies to YOU as well. As usual, after talking about taking the high road you opted, as always for the low road. Thus reverting to your usual mean.

Someday perhaps you will learn when to just STFU as ggait has already suggested.

But that would require you to stop trolling here.

Only 15 out of 46 Presidents served in a war zone during their military service - that's 32%

I'm not criticizing Walz for not serving in a war zone. I'm criticizing him for giving the impression that he did, like your senior Senator from CT.

Nice diversion. Neither you nor JDoucebag Vance know the actual facts. You both should stop talking like you do.

Walz has told us the facts. His current campaign has corrected their website.

That’s honorable.

[Typical Lax Dad]

https://www.threads.net/@beckybooleo/po ... qTIwtLW5aA

[njbill]

I wasn’t paying close attention yesterday. Did Trump claim he was at Martin Luther King‘s I have a dream speech or did he claim he wrote it?

[DMac]

old salt wrote
I think you underestimate the hazard in Vance's service. He was based at Al-Asad in Anbar province which is still under attack. He embedded in civil affairs team which went into Iraqi villiages. Unlike Walz, he carried an assault rifle in a war zone, was exposed to IEDs & snipers, & earned hazardous duty pay.
Walz's service was commendable, but he never faced the risks that Vance did on deployment.
Corporal Vance did not have the option to volunteer for his assignment. He went where his unit deployed & did his assigned tasks.

Man, salty, that R thing really does have a chokehold on you. I'll never understand the more or less blind allegiance both the Ds and Rs have to their letter.
Why couldn't Vance have volunteered to go?
I did and the bureau was quick to get back to me and grant my request.
I carried an M16 in a war zone and received hazardous duty pay too. So
did a whole lot of others who never fired a shot at anyone or ever get shot
at. I could embellish and make it sound much more hazardous than it was as
you are with Vance but I won't and never do.

[old salt]

Exactly...he did not volunteer for that service, so we have no idea whether he'd have done so.

That's ridiculous. He enlisted after 9-11, when we had Marines in Iraq & Afghanistan.
He knew he'd almost certainly end up in a war zone. The only uncertainty was which war zone.

[old salt]

old salt wrote
I think you underestimate the hazard in Vance's service. He was based at Al-Asad in Anbar province which is still under attack. He embedded in civil affairs team which went into Iraqi villiages. Unlike Walz, he carried an assault rifle in a war zone, was exposed to IEDs & snipers, & earned hazardous duty pay.
Walz's service was commendable, but he never faced the risks that Vance did on deployment.
Corporal Vance did not have the option to volunteer for his assignment. He went where his unit deployed & did his assigned tasks.

Man, salty, that R thing really does have a chokehold on you. I'll never understand the more or less blind allegiance both the Ds and Rs have to their letter.
Why couldn't Vance have volunteered to go?
I did and the bureau was quick to get back to me and grant my request.
I carried an M16 in a war zone and received hazardous duty pay too. So
did a whole lot of others who never fired a shot at anyone or ever get shot
at. I could embellish and make it sound much more hazardous than it was as
you are with Vance but I won't and never do.

Your situation was entirely different than Vance's. You had to volunteer to go.
He was assigned to a deploying MEU. Vance is not embellishing his service or bragging about carrying a rifle.
He doesn't have to. It came with the job. He said in his book that he was lucky to escape any real fighting.

[MDlaxfan76]

The guy making the claim served in Iraq. He earned the right to make the claim.

Serving in a war zone doesn't earn you the right to criticize a fellow soldier for something you yourself didn't see or witness.

Come to think of it, that applies to YOU as well. As usual, after talking about taking the high road you opted, as always for the low road. Thus reverting to your usual mean.

Someday perhaps you will learn when to just STFU as ggait has already suggested.

But that would require you to stop trolling here.

Only 15 out of 46 Presidents served in a war zone during their military service - that's 32%

I'm not criticizing Walz for not serving in a war zone. I'm criticizing him for giving the impression that he did, like your senior Senator from CT.

There you go...now you're actually telling the truth.
Walz never misrepresented what he did and did not do, critics misrepresented him and here you are so eager to believe that.

I don't have a Senator from CT. I'm not from Connecticut and I'm not a Dem, so maybe you have me confused with someone else, ala Jerry and willie confuses your guy?

[DMac]

MEU...what is that?
I would think anyone in any unit could volunteer at any time.
Send a request to the bureau and see what they say.

[old salt]

The guy making the claim served in Iraq. He earned the right to make the claim.

Serving in a war zone doesn't earn you the right to criticize a fellow soldier for something you yourself didn't see or witness.

Come to think of it, that applies to YOU as well. As usual, after talking about taking the high road you opted, as always for the low road. Thus reverting to your usual mean.

Someday perhaps you will learn when to just STFU as ggait has already suggested.

But that would require you to stop trolling here.

Only 15 out of 46 Presidents served in a war zone during their military service - that's 32%

I'm not criticizing Walz for not serving in a war zone. I'm criticizing him for giving the impression that he did, like your senior Senator from CT.

There you go...now you're actually telling the truth.
Walz never misrepresented what he did and did not do, critics misrepresented him and here you are so eager to believe that.

I don't have a Senator from CT. I'm not from Connecticut and I'm not a Dem, so maybe you have me confused with someone else, ala Jerry and willie confuses your guy?

...no, you're just finally reading what I've been writing without your biased interpretation.

The CT Senator was for Kismet.

[old salt]

MEU...what is that?
I would think anyone in any unit could volunteer at any time.
Send a request to the bureau and see what they say.

He was assigned to a MAW (Marine Air Wing) which was part of a MEU (Marine Expeditionary Unit).