Why Vets are Still Backing Trump after Khan Controversy

[Fuzzy Bear]

Must have a pretty dark heart.

My youngest adult son served in Afghanistan, and is voting for Trump.

Does EVERYONE who votes for Trump have a "dark heart"?  If you think that, is your heart darkened by being over-politicized?

[Fuzzy Bear]

Must have a pretty dark heart.

My youngest adult son served in Afghanistan, and is voting for Trump.

Does EVERYONE who votes for Trump have a "dark heart"?  If you think that, is your heart darkened by being over-politicized?

Yes and no.

A vote for Trump transcends politics because it makes you an apologist for racism, bigotry, and prideful ignorance.

I don't agree; there are two less than appetizing choices this year.  People are doing the best they can with what they have to work with.  But if what you say is true, a vote for Clinton transcends politics because it makes you an apologist for dishonest in high office and intimidating victims of domestic violence/sexual assault into silence.  I would also argue that my case is clearer than your case.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Because they're sick of establishment's wars all over the world.

But insulting of Khan family was dumbest thing Trump ever did.

Khan put himself in the political arena.  Anyone who does that is fair game for a rebuttal.  And Trump went fairly easy on him, by Trump standards.

I was unaware that questioning a gold star parent's loyalties, attempting to string him together with the group that killed his own son was going "fairly easy."
Trump does not rebuttal. That requires careful thought and concise language. He just throws tantrums at people he doesn't like for the things they say about him regardless of their standing or the quality of their criticisms.

Yes.
And let's not forget about his initial attack on the mother/wife (Mrs Kahn).
She was so distraught about her son's death and nervous on stage, she did not say a word at the DNC. But yet trump felt it was "proper" to attack her, based on her religion.
Disgusting.

I understand that grief can last a lifetime.  I know folks who have lost a child who have never fully gotten over it.

That being said, the phrase here implies that Captain Khan was a recent casualty.  He was killed in 2004; that's 12 years ago. 

Mr. Khan let loose with an attack on Trump and reading the Constitution.  Yet Mr. Khan is a believer in Sharia Law, and he's got a paper trail on the issue.  He's also an immigration lawyer, and he's got a paper trail on that issue as well.  The Khan's jumped into the political pool with both feet.  They got what they could reasonably expect when they became partisan advocates. 

But let's hear from Gold Star Mothers themselves:

http://www.goldstarmoms.com/PressRelease082305.htm

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This is in response to Cindy Sheehan, et al.  The statement, however, speaks for itself.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Because they're sick of establishment's wars all over the world.

But insulting of Khan family was dumbest thing Trump ever did.

Khan put himself in the political arena.  Anyone who does that is fair game for a rebuttal.  And Trump went fairly easy on him, by Trump standards.

I was unaware that questioning a gold star parent's loyalties, attempting to string him together with the group that killed his own son was going "fairly easy."
Trump does not rebuttal. That requires careful thought and concise language. He just throws tantrums at people he doesn't like for the things they say about him regardless of their standing or the quality of their criticisms.

Yes.
And let's not forget about his initial attack on the mother/wife (Mrs Kahn).
She was so distraught about her son's death and nervous on stage, she did not say a word at the DNC. But yet trump felt it was "proper" to attack her, based on her religion.
Disgusting.

I understand that grief can last a lifetime.  I know folks who have lost a child who have never fully gotten over it.

That being said, the phrase here implies that Captain Khan was a recent casualty.  He was killed in 2004; that's 12 years ago. 

Mr. Khan let loose with an attack on Trump and reading the Constitution.  Yet Mr. Khan is a believer in Sharia Law, and he's got a paper trail on the issue.  He's also an immigration lawyer, and he's got a paper trail on that issue as well.  The Khan's jumped into the political pool with both feet.  They got what they could reasonably expect when they became partisan advocates. 

But let's hear from Gold Star Mothers themselves:

http://www.goldstarmoms.com/PressRelease082305.htm

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This is in response to Cindy Sheehan, et al.  The statement, however, speaks for itself.

As I said in the thread about Khan, Trump was most likely right.

But stil he had absolutly nothing to win saying it. It did hurt him. And it was very dumb.

I agree that Mrs. Khan should have been left out of Trump's statement, even if he guessed right.

As for Mr. Khan, Trump should have pointed out that the man entered the political fray, and doesn't have an expectation of being received uncritically under those circumstances.

[Fuzzy Bear]

I'm pretty sure Trump has the support of the veterans who tortured prisoners in Abu Ghraib.

Oh snap no you di-int!

Somebody find that female soldier from West Virginia in the Abu Ghraib photos and ask her who she's supporting. After the way she was thrown under the bus by the Bush Administration, it shouldn't be Trump.

Not that I condone what went on with Abu Gharaib.  But that female soldier who was thrown under the bus by the Bushies would probably appreciate how Trump took on Bush in his own party.  Trump has done more to discredit the Bushes than any Democrat ever.