Widgetized Section
Go to Admin » Appearance » Widgets » and move Gabfire Widget: Social into that MastheadOverlay zone
Mitt Romney Didn’t Mention Our Veterans Once During Foreign Policy Debate
We can make lots of jokes about horses and bayonets, but there is something else about last night’s debate that showed a sharp contrast between the President, the former Governor and the former governor’s various alter-egos.
For all the alter egos we have seen, none of them have the ability to understand people or their needs. Rather he sees people as a means to an end. Once they have served their purpose, they don’t exist. Whether the people in question are the formerly unborn, the formerly employed or are former troops.
While there were moments that Romney mentioned sending troops to this place and that not once did he acknowledge, let alone express concern, for veterans.
As noted by Rob Diamond, who is Obama for America’s National Veterans and Military Families Vote Director,
After years on the campaign trail, Mitt Romney has proven one thing: he doesn’t get it when it comes to America’s veterans. Rather than honor the sacred trust we have with our veterans, wounded warriors and military families, Mitt Romney failed to mention our veterans even once during a 90-minute debate focused on foreign policy, wars abroad and America’s future in the world. While Mitt Romney wrote off half of our country as people who see themselves as “victims,” which includes veterans receiving the benefits they’ve earned, President Obama understands that war has consequences and that we have an obligation to our service members not just when they are serving, but when they return home as well.
Romney does mention the “troops”, as if they were inanimate objects rather than human beings. For all the time he had to speak during last night’s debate, not once did the former Governor mention veterans.
Feel free to check the transcript.
Romney does talk about “the troops” as if they were pieces on his global chessboard. At no time, does he consider that maybe they deserve a President who cares about their concerns when they come home as veterans.
Romney did talk about how he wouldn’t cut spending to the military, but that wasn’t a reference to our veterans, though it’s often confused as such. The Department of Veterans Affairs is part of the executive branch, with its head appointed by the President. Veterans Affairs funding is not a part of the Defense Department budget.
Sometimes the things people don’t say speak louder than the words they utter. It isn’t like the former Governor didn’t have an opportunity to express concern about veterans issues. From the onset, he was Palin without lipstick – answering the questions that could only be heard in his head. He had all the time he needed and then some. If Romney had concern about the Veterans, he certainly had many opportunities to explain his policies to address their needs.
His silence reflects the one characteristic that we see in all of Willard’s alter egos. He doesn’t get people. Once people serve his purpose, they cease to exist.
Once you have served Romney’s purpose, you become a “victim”. After risking your life to serve our Country, you bad veterans think you are entitled to food or a mention during a presidential debate. In Romney world, veterans are part of that 47% he doesn’t think are worth caring about, let alone giving some words to during a presidential debate.
It isn’t as if this is the first time Romney failed to acknowledge the men and women who sacrificed their lives for our wars. He also didn’t find time to thank the troops during his acceptance speech at the Republican Convention.
Mitt Romney is someone who takes pride in “harvesting” companies, costing people their jobs and their communities. He doesn’t get that people’s labor made it possible to have something to “harvest” He doesn’t get that “letting” women out of their corporate binders so that they can cook dinner, isn’t equal pay for equal work. He doesn’t get anything beyond that shallow Romney bubble that he and Ann built. His lack of concern and understanding of people even on the most basic level, means Romney may want the title of President, but he doesn’t want the work that comes with the title.
The fact that he doesn’t see the value in people who build peace and security around the world means Romney may want the title of Commander in Chief, but he lacks an understand of the work that comes with the title.
Image from CBS
Related Posts :
President Obama was on his way to victory in the third debate, but it was the horses and bayonets moment ...
Memorial Day is more than a holiday for cookouts and afternoon baseball games. It is a holiday to remember t ...
Mitt Romney tried to walk away from his 47% comments last night by calling them "wrong". Not so fast, sa ...
The reaction is pouring in, and the consensus is that Mitt Romney lost the second presidential debate. T ...
In Mitt Romney's new ad, "Highest Responsibility," he doubles down on the way out of date comments he ma ...
8 Responses to Mitt Romney Didn’t Mention Our Veterans Once During Foreign Policy Debate
WTF1113
Oct. 23rd, 2012 at 2:16 pm
Maybe he thought that the President was talking about veterinarians and was wondering why there was a personal attack about Seamus during a foreign policy debate.
Deanne
Oct. 23rd, 2012 at 2:31 pm
To not mention the ‘Troops’ in the debate — no different than the RNC convention where he neglected to acknowledge them in his speech.
It’s like Mitt Romney pre-packages the ‘troops’ under ‘Military’. The ‘troops’ are a means to an end.
I checked the transcript to confirm as I thought he referred to ‘soldiers’ — which he did. Soldiers are Army. It’s like the 47%, he so easily dismisses so many — like the Navy, Marines, Air Force, et al. My Navy nephew doesn’t appreciate being called a ‘soldier’. I asked – he growled!!!
To also refer to ‘soldiers’, is like his comparing the Navy to 1916, and all the comparison references of long ago days — It’s ‘OLD’ — ‘Old School’ thinking/language. Neocon Old School thinking.
When you see Romney/GOP continue to say ‘that wasn’t my/his position’ or ‘I/he didn’t say that’ when he’s been called out for his flip flopping, it’s glaring in that you wonder whether he/they truly have a grasp on today’s technology as the evidence of video, etc. it there for all to see of his past positions, speeches, ads even back to the days of running against Kennedy. Technology is a major part of foreign policy, military, etc. It’s not all the neocon ‘boots on the ground’ anymore.
Actually, another issue separate from veterans –Romney’s mention last night that jumped out of my TV screen was his pledge for support for “gender equality” abroad. WTF???
Romney in the last townhall debate wouldn’t answer the question about whether he supported the Lilly Ledbetter bill at home yet is willing to pledge support abroad.
American women are part of the 47% as we’ve continued to be reminded by Romney.
Basheert
Oct. 23rd, 2012 at 2:42 pm
If you are not a vet, and (like Rmoney) probably have never even MET a veteran, have no family members who have served, why would a person like MittWit even think about vets?
He has no clue – if it isn’t in his sphere of influence – and/or it cannot be bought, he is not interested in it.
Veterans fall into that category evidently.
TigerLily
Oct. 23rd, 2012 at 2:47 pm
ROMNEY: “Our Navy is smaller now than at any time since 1917,” the Republican nominee said, also noting that “our Air Force is older and smaller than at any time since it was founded in 1947.”
OBAMA: Obama fired back, suggesting Romney “maybe hasn’t spent enough time looking at how our military works.”
“You mentioned the Navy, for example, and that we have fewer ships than we did in 1916,” Obama said. “Well, governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets because the nature of our military has changed.”
Sarcastically noting that the Navy now has “these things called aircraft carriers, where planes land on them” as well as “ships that go underwater, nuclear submarines,” Obama concluded that “the question is not a game of ‘Battleship,’ where we’re counting ships — it’s what are our capabilities.”
POOF! I LOVED IT!!
How anyone can vote for this man who lies with no shame day after day?
Even changing his policies to match Obama’s –if that will help him WIN…is not only blatant and insulting to us all but a very cruel and mentally twisted strategy, I would say.
The level of lying this man does would throw anyone off.
But not this time. Not last nite. Not with our President Obama. DANG!
I personally feel much safer with our President Obama making foreign policy decisions, but more importantly for calling out the LIAR that Romney is.
He needed to do that for you, me and America! And he did. Romney could end up in the WH. Frightening, to say the least. Especially for all those women in binders!
This President has shown us time and again who he cares for and who he’s fighting for No. 1 all the time. He fights for not just the 47% but ALL OF US 100%!
We are definitely not the Romney types…he stands for corporations first, outsourcing jobs second, vacations in the Cayman Islands with his $$250 meelion$$, third!!
Yeah…I want this man for my president. NOT! Remember, corporations are people to Romney.
He would get us…
Anne
Oct. 23rd, 2012 at 8:04 pm
He doesn’t even pay much lip service to veterans like most Republican politicians do. Everything is a matter of how it fits with his “balance sheet” mentality which objectifies people. That’s how he can justify having thrown thousands of Americans under the bus after they were subjected to the indignities of being forced to train their replacements and then being fired so their jobs can go overseas. That attitude includes veterans, whose needs the GOP cavalierly disregards while looking at them as so much cannon fodder. So, it’s not surprising that he didn’t mention them.
Lily Lorber
Oct. 23rd, 2012 at 8:16 pm
Mitt Romney is NO friend of anyone except the BIG RICH. Romney supported his TEA BAG Republican myrmidons each and EVERY time they BLOCKED Bills which were for VETERANS. – - – - Romney’s Republican allies in Congress BLOCKED the Veterans Job Bill. Just this summer in the midst of Romney’s campaign. – - – Other Bills BLOCKED by Republicans include: Enhancements to the Troops-to-Teachers Program.Fiscal year 2011 increase in military basic pay. Improving aural protection for members of the Armed Forces. Protection of child custody arrangements for parents who are members of the Armed Forces deployed in support of a contingency operation. Comprehensive policy on neurocognitive assessment by the military health care system. Authority to make excess nonlethal supplies available for domestic emergency assistance.
Lily Lorber
Oct. 23rd, 2012 at 8:24 pm
In Monday night’s debate, Romney once again uttered the phrase VOUCHER SYSTEM. Romney would like to eliminate most of the Veteran’s Administration and turn your Medical Care into a Voucher System. This should scare you as much as it does me !
Veterans did something noble which draft-dodging Romney never did: they gave years of service to our great country; many put their lives on the line in combat; and some made the supreme sacrifice.
* To issue a voucher with the intent of limiting their total medical benefits is SHAMEFUL ! ( No wonder Romney suggested it.)
There are a great number of MEDICAL PROBLEMS directly linked to active service in Afghanistan and Iraq. Among these, is a LIFE THREATENING DISEASE known as LEISHMANIASIS or “Bagdad Boil” which is transmitted by sand flea bites in that part of the world.
Leishmaniasis is extremely DIFFICULT and EXPENSIVE to TREAT. Further, often the disease is not completely completely eradicated and can and usually does re-occur. The most successful drug regimine is LIPOSOMAL AMHOTERICIN-B which would cost a grown man about $20,000 and up per treatment. ( Anyone with an interest can search the internet for a drug source, find pricing information, and doseages and do the math.)
PLEASE SAY “NO” to any plan which would limit the medical care we give to our veterans !
Once infected by Leishmaniasis a human can develope “cutaneous” Leishmaniasis which if severe can be disfiguring. Also any ONE of the different species of Leishmania can also cause “visceral” Leishmaniasis which affects the internal organs and will lead to death.
For more information consult this World health Organization Link.
www.who.int/leishmaniasis...
Lily Lorber
Oct. 23rd, 2012 at 8:31 pm
> Mitt Romney excuses DRAFT-DODGING the Vietnam War by claiming that he was actively working as part of a Mormon Mission. This is UNTRUE. Romney’s Paris, France stay would be more accurately classified as an extended vacation.
Keeping in mind the Mormon prohibition against drinking alcohol of any kind: EXPLAIN how he was DRUNK and involved in a fatal car crash in France ? !
In 1968, Romney, allegedly a Mormon missionary in France, was zooming his Citroen through the small town of Bernos-Beaulac, when he slammed headlong into a car driven by a BISHOP JEAN VILNET. For many years, Mitt claimed that the accident killed a drunken priest named Albert Marie, who had caused the collision by swerving at high speed into Romney’s lane. That story was not true. The “priest” did not die, was not drunk, was not traveling at high speed, and was not at fault.
For what it’s worth, the “priest” was then, and is now, a BISHOP; and his name is not Albert Marie.
Apparently the only person under the influence was Mitt Romney.- – - – The Le Monde (France) reports: More than 40 years later, André and Paulette Salarnier, French Mormons who often cooked “coq au vin” and mushroom-stuffed crepes for the young Romney, say they received several emails from the candidate’s entourage asking them to no longer speak to reporters about the 1968 accident.