this post was submitted on 08 Aug 2024
370 points (97.7% liked)

politics

19072 readers
3668 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 147 points 3 months ago (2 children)

"Come to think of it, denigrating the worth of a soldier’s service based on whether he deployed to a war zone is… kind of like denigrating the worth of a woman’s citizenship based on whether she happens to have children.”

— Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, on X, defending Gov. Tim Walz against accusations by Sen. J.D. Vance.

Damn Pete, you did it again...

[–] [email protected] 27 points 3 months ago

Buttigieg is like the bouncer, but for social media.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

I was thinking it is almost its own form of stolen valor, but I'm not a vet, so my opinions remain just that.

Edit: "it" being to denigrate Waltz's honorable and valued service, in case that wasn't clear

[–] [email protected] 29 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (3 children)

Not only that, but for JD Vance to act like his service was real service while Walz wasn't is just insulting to over 90% of the military that didn't deploy to a combat zone. Neither of them chose where to deploy. The military chooses for you. Also, Vance was in motherfucking public affairs. ~~Dude had a cushy ass job, probably spending his time checking grammar errors in press releases. He's acting like he was Ricky Recon fighting in Fallujah.~~ Additionally, Vance did 4 years, while Walz did 24 years. Walz also deployed to disaster response and got a fancy award called Nebraska Citizen-Soldier of the Year. Vance is being pathetic with his miltary superiority bs.

Edit: I was mistaken. It seems like he escorted journalists around and helped Iraqis, so he performed important and dangerous tasks.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 months ago (2 children)

The greasy weasel is gatekeeping.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago

There's a pretty high number of combat veterans who feel superior to the rest of us with non-combat roles. Humans get clique-y in every space it seems.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago

The greasy weasel is gatekeeping.

He is, right‽

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Dude had a cushy ass job, probably spending his time checking grammar errors in press releases.

I heard his role involved escorting journalists around Iraq, but yes, it seems he never experienced combat. ^[1]

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago

Look who's talking shit about someone's military service now! ^it's me. I'm the one talking shit.^ 😬🤦‍♂️

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 months ago

probably spending his time checking grammar errors in press releases.

He was educated under No Child Left Behind. Is he capable of that job?

[–] [email protected] 104 points 3 months ago (2 children)

The article comes to a proper conclusion with this paragraph.

Twenty-four years of service is nothing to sneeze at, and Vance is running alongside a known draft dodger who has repeatedly disparaged veterans and Gold Star families. If Vance wants to critique a man’s honor, he should start with his running mate.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 3 months ago (2 children)

I just can't help but wonder what Vance's tactic was here. Pointing out a Democrat's military service is only going to further shine a light onto Trump's lack of it.

Did Vance even serve?

[–] [email protected] 20 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Yes. He did 4 years and was stationed in Iraq where he did not see combat because as he was assigned to public affairs and spent his time in an air conditioned office writing press releases.

Vance, who served in the Marines from 2003 to 2007 and deployed to Iraq, has said in his memoir that he never saw real combat and that he worked in the public affairs department while on deployment.

/Edit to add link

//2nd Edit to add that I don't mean to disparage Vance's service, only to point out the hypocrisy of him attacking another veteran for not seeing combat while he himself admits that he never saw combat.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago

Vance served in Iraq though he never saw combat himself.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Oh yeah. Private Bonespurs.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 3 months ago

That's Cadet Bone Spurs, to you. He never actually held any rank, not even private. (Thanks to Senator Tammy Duckworth for that appellation, btw).

[–] [email protected] 68 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Vance's claim that Walz abandoned his unit to avoid deployment to Iraq -- which has been echoed throughout the right -- was directly countered by Army Lt. Col. Ryan Rossman, director of operations for the Minnesota National Guard, who spoke to HuffPost.

The unit "received an alert order for mobilization to Iraq on July 14, 2005," Rossman said, two months after Walz retired. According to CNN, Walz first filed his paperwork to run for Congress in January of that same year, and -- as several veterans have noted -- the administrative process of a military retirement typically takes several months before approval. His unit would not deploy to Iraq until March of 2006.

JustseemingDesperate Vance is lying about as much as his idol

[–] [email protected] 18 points 3 months ago

Dumbass doesn't even know what stolen valor is. Walz never claimed to be an Iraq combat vet.

[–] [email protected] 54 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (3 children)

Article I saw yesterday says Walz left at 41 and a year before his unit was deployed. Maybe I’m ignorant of how the military operates but a year? It seems like he likely wouldn’t have known it was coming.

[–] [email protected] 36 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, but he had a DUI once and I DO NOT VOTE FOR CRIMINALS. So, I have to vote for Trump.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 3 months ago

Yeah, misdemeanor has more letters than felony so it just be worse!

[–] [email protected] 34 points 3 months ago

Even if he had suspicions, he'd been in service for 24 years, which is huge.

If I worked for someone for 24 years and they looked like they wanted to go fight overseas, I'd absolutely consider retirement as well.

Service to your country isn't accomplished exclusively by going overseas to shoot people.

Republicans are literally speed running a 100% completed anti-christ identity. Not even in the specific 'end of days antichrist', but like literally, specifically, the complete opposite of absolutely everything their Christian deity Jesus stood for.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The deployment was announced months after he put in for retirement.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Do you have a source? This seems pretty fair to assume either way but I will inevitably need to argue with family about this and i like to keep my positions airtight lol

[–] [email protected] 12 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Yes. The Minnesota National Guard is the source of this information.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Did they make an official statement or something? Is there somewhere I can look up the deployment/claim? Again I take this as very likely true at face value. It makes sense and enough people have said it at this point that it seems like it’s likely the case. But I just like to always double check these things for myself. This is not skepticism it’s just a good personal policy.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

Funny, because with a fraction of typing and effort that you put into the previous two of your comments, you could’ve just googled that, and you would’ve gotten your answer.

That being the case, you obviously aren’t interested in knowing the answer to that question, you’re just here to troll.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

I wasn’t trolling and I did try to look it up confirming it but between google turning to shit and the pile of articles about this over the last 2 days it’s been difficult. So if you have one please share it because I genuinely want to see one before i repeat it as fact. I don’t understand why this is so controversial.

You’re complaining that I’ve been commenting about this instead of looking it up and saying that it would’ve been easier, but you are engaging in the exact same behavior. So why don’t you just share it with me at this point? Why are we fighting over this?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago

This “troll” is sharing a source with you someone else was able to find. Enjoy. As I suspected and said several times, looks legit. Walz didn’t do anything wrong or weird.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It's fair to ask.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/tim-walz-military-record/

He filed his campaign paperwork in February 2005, which would have necessitated his retirement. In March the MN Guard announced a partial deployment but his unit wasn't specifically told they were deploying, he retired in May, his unit received orders to deploy in July.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

Thank you this is helpful!

[–] [email protected] 39 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Why is there any rank dispute?

[–] [email protected] 34 points 3 months ago

Because facts don't matter to their feelings.

[–] [email protected] 37 points 3 months ago (1 children)

he's gotta do something to distract attention away from his couch fucking

[–] [email protected] 29 points 3 months ago (3 children)

J.D. Vance did not fuck a couch. Please stop saying that J.D. fucked a couch. J.D. never once fucked a couch and he never will fuck a couch. I will deny that J.D. Vance fucked a couch forever and ever, because J.D. Vance, candidate for Vice President of the United States of America DID NOT fuck a couch. But I would believe it if it were true.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 months ago

he never will fuck a couch

At least keep an open mind 😏

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago

Pump the brakes a little bit, you can't say he never did it. You can say there's no proof he ever fucked a couch. We may never know.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 3 months ago

Doesn't this move just call attention to Trump's "bone spurs"? It should.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)
[–] [email protected] 14 points 3 months ago

I see where JD is coming from. He's coming from his dick which is currently placed in an Uptown Black Leather 84'' Sofa at Bob's Discount Furniture on Monroe St in Toledo, OH.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 3 months ago

BS and a weird thing to do

[–] [email protected] 10 points 3 months ago (1 children)

And where was Trump at during the Vietnam war when he was supposed to be called up for duty...?

Honestly, I think Trump should own that one and just come out and say, "I thought it was an unjust war and I didn't want to participate in it," but that undercuts the attack they're trying to make against Walz, which is already a pretty weak argument as it is. Plus, it makes Trump look like a coward (amongst Republicans).

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

...which he is though. He's dodging debates imagine combat

[–] [email protected] 9 points 3 months ago

Says the creepy former marine who is a little too interested in marine life.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 months ago (1 children)

What are Cadet Bone Spurs thoughts on this? Oh yeah, he thinks veterans are suckers.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 months ago

No one knows. He’s been oddly absent and silent except for a couple plaintive wails on truth social. For which I am grateful. The joyful warrior schtick is much more palatable fare for the 24hr news cycle.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It is all over x now. Every bot is now spewing this lie after every Harris/Waltz post.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 months ago

Elon Musk feverishly boosting them in the background in a desperate attempt to save his dream of being an untouchable oligarch

load more comments
view more: next ›