Tasteless campaign ad

23 posts / 0 new
Last post
rigel1
rigel1's picture

This is bad. Really bad. Military service should never be bragged about. When this happens it becomes self service not military service. Watch this ad and try not to barf.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YmQ2UNjAdmY

Comments

Art
Art's picture
I hear a lot of ads on the

I hear a lot of ads on the radio about how these young people are so proud of having endured the physical trials they had to get through to become a Marine. "I had what it takes". 

I thought they were pretty good ads. I never felt like barfing at all. 

rigel1
rigel1's picture
Art wrote: I hear a lot of

Art wrote:

I hear a lot of ads on the radio about how these young people are so proud of having endured the physical trials they had to get through to become a Marine. "I had what it takes". 

I thought they were pretty good ads. I never felt like barfing at all. 

One should never brag about military service. It is not appropriate. I say that as a Marine.

Art
Art's picture
Quote:One should never brag

Quote:
One should never brag about military service. It is not appropriate. I say that as a Marine.
But, these ads were produced by the Marine Corp. Doesn't that seem odd?

Bush_Wacker
Bush_Wacker's picture
They've been using their

They've been using their military background as a pedestal politically forever.  They always will.  I don't see anything inherintly bad about it.  It's part of who they are and it's best to know who candidates are before they get into office than to find out who they are after they get into office.

rigel1
rigel1's picture
Art wrote: Quote:One should

Art wrote:

Quote:
One should never brag about military service. It is not appropriate. I say that as a Marine.
But, these ads were produced by the Marine Corp. Doesn't that seem odd?

Yes very odd. I have never heard on any branch of the military ever getting behind or endorsing a political candidate. Has this ever happened before?

rigel1
rigel1's picture
Bush_Wacker wrote: They've

Bush_Wacker wrote:

They've been using their military background as a pedestal politically forever.  They always will.  I don't see anything inherintly bad about it.  It's part of who they are and it's best to know who candidates are before they get into office than to find out who they are after they get into office.

You can mention it, but an entire ad that devoted to militry exploits is over the top. There are hundreds of thousands of military vets in the US. What makes him any better or more qualified than them? 

Bush_Wacker
Bush_Wacker's picture
I'm pretty sure that George

I'm pretty sure that George Washington was elected President almost entirely base on his military career.  I'm sure there are others as well.  I agree, it is a little tasteless but not a new idea by any means.

rigel1
rigel1's picture
Bush_Wacker wrote: I'm pretty

Bush_Wacker wrote:

I'm pretty sure that George Washington was elected President almost entirely base on his military career.  I'm sure there are others as well.  I agree, it is a little tasteless but not a new idea by any means.

No doubt he did. But there is any record of him running around and bragging about it? I doubt it.

Art
Art's picture
Quote:Yes very odd. I have

Quote:
Yes very odd. I have never heard on any branch of the military ever getting behind or endorsing a political candidate. Has this ever happened before?
These seem to be recruiting ads. It sounds like they want people to be proud enough of their military service to tell other people about it. I don't see why politicians should be any different. Is this something you lose sleep over?

camaroman
camaroman's picture
Worked for Kerry didn't it. I

Worked for Kerry didn't it. I wouldn't vote for him.

antikakistocrat
antikakistocrat's picture
So it is the US Military that

So it is the US Military that is most awake to NWO operations and plans.

Who better to elect to stop these Globalists.

What would scare the hell out of me is some Obamanoid campaigning for office willing to do whatever the Bilderberg Group told him/her.

camaroman
camaroman's picture
That is what you will get

That is what you will get with Obama or Romney, a Bilderberg puppet. They could care less which puppet the sheeple vote for.

Art
Art's picture
Quote:What would scare the

Quote:
What would scare the hell out of me is some Obamanoid campaigning for office willing to do whatever the Bilderberg Group told him/her.
Quote:
That is what you will get with Obama or Romney, a Bilderberg puppet. They could care less which puppet the sheeple vote for.
So, what are you saying? Did the politician's ad make you guys want to puke, or not?

antikakistocrat
antikakistocrat's picture
No the military members are

No the military members are the most alert when it comes to the threat of Globalism.  This ad is not tasteless in the least.

rigel1
rigel1's picture
Art wrote: Quote:Yes very

Art wrote:

Quote:
Yes very odd. I have never heard on any branch of the military ever getting behind or endorsing a political candidate. Has this ever happened before?
These seem to be recruiting ads. It sounds like they want people to be proud enough of their military service to tell other people about it. I don't see why politicians should be any different. Is this something you lose sleep over?

No.

workingman
workingman's picture
I was in the Marines I do not

I was in the Marines I do not see anything wrong with the ad. He might have wanted to add a little more about his education or stance on issues.

Art
Art's picture
Quote:I was in the Marines I

Quote:
I was in the Marines I do not see anything wrong with the ad. He might have wanted to add a little more about his education or stance on issues.
Poor Rigel1 had all sorts of gastro-intestinal issues over the ad. Sad, really.

Have you looked into that business about Clinton and the CRA forcing banks to issue mortgage loans to  unqualified borrowers?

workingman
workingman's picture
Art wrote: Quote:I was in the

Art wrote:

Quote:
I was in the Marines I do not see anything wrong with the ad. He might have wanted to add a little more about his education or stance on issues.
Poor Rigel1 had all sorts of gastro-intestinal issues over the ad. Sad, really.

Have you looked into that business about Clinton and the CRA forcing banks to issue mortgage loans to  unqualified borrowers?

Yes I have it's like this as the Clinton And Bush wanted the banks to loan money in low income areas. The banks had to lower their standards so that more people could qualify for the loans. Once these lower standards were put in place more people that could not pay the loan back were given money.

Each time the congress past the law And the president signed the expanded cra it forced bankd to lower its standards in order to stay in complience which the law.

But they banks also took the lowering of standards to far And gave loans out through more preditory lenders. However those preditory lenders are now being prosicuted for fruad by the fbi.

Art
Art's picture
Thank you for finally

Thank you for finally responding. Your explanation doesn't explain anything. If it made sense, then we would only have seen these foreclosures low income neighborhoods. I don't think Nevada is a low income neighborhood, yet that is where we saw the most foreclosures. There's no evidence that the banks were forced to issue loans to unqualified borrowers in low income neighborhoods. The law is written only to force banks to make loans available to people who happen to live in low income neighborhoods but who are qualified. That isn't the same thing. 

delete jan in iowa
Going along with what Art is

Going along with what Art is saying.  It's a banker's JOB to assess risk.  These guys were NOT doing their jobs.  The regulations that were enacted were about Redlining neighborhoods.  There were NO quotas placed on the bankers.  

Personal responsibility..... the bankers accept no personal responsibility for making fraudulent loans to folks they knew were poor credit risks.  The problem is with the bankers who DID NOT DO THEIR JOBS!

workingman
workingman's picture
That is correct bankers are

That is correct bankers are not reaponsible for your loan you are, but bankers Will loan money to people who are not quailified if they know fannie mae And freddie mac Will take the risk off of their hands.

workingman
workingman's picture
Once the standards are

Once the standards are lowered anyone can get the loans And buy a House where they want if they can afford it or not. No risk to banks because they know the feds Will bail them out.

Last two posts while drunk, from phone.