So what did Jason get wrong?

For starters, did "Willard Mitt Romney" actually write this letter?

When he misrepresents issues and/or gets stuff wrong, he uses 'it is satire' as his defense...

@St. Swithin...He has not followed the correct chronological order. If I have my facts correct; Romney graduated in 1965 and spent the next year at Stanford. When he was 19 he went on his mission to France which lasted 2.5 years, making him 21 or 22 when he returned. He received his student deferment when he immediately enrolled at BYU. By the time he graduated he would have been 25 or 26 and then off to Harvard.

@Cowdung,
I don't really like Jason doing this satire shtick either. I have commented on this in the past. However, except for idiots like Pennypacker, I think we all understood that this was not really written by Romney. I was asking you if details like the deferments was accurate.

Yes, I get that Romney didn't write the letter. The issue is that it is hard to distinguish what is supposed to be fiction and what is Jason's actual misrepresentation of the political positions of the target of his hit piece. It's hard to separate the fiction from the fiction...

@H.E. Pennypacker...Iran doesn't pose a serious threat to us, but to our regional allies. However, the sanctions have got Iran on the ropes and all we need to do is wait them out.

Lyle,

You misunderstand this issue. Refined radioactive material can easily be smuggled into any country. A dirty bomb with 55 pounds of material would shut down any city for months. There have been several arrests of people in the UK an the US who were attempting to make such a bomb.

@Luke...I know all about dirty bombs. I also know that we do have a concern about uncontrolled nuclear material. So what is your point? There's a number of sources for nuclear material including medical right here in the U.S.

Lyle,

Take a guess. If Iran makes neuclear material, then..........

Lyle,

One more thing. Uncontrolled nuclear material and medical material are nothing compared to what I am talking about. It's like comparing a sneeze to the flu.

Lyle - "I know all about dirty bombs." You are absolutely amazing! We are so fortunate to have you on this site!

Not only do you know all about history, economics, women, sex, birth control, Bren, literature, math, creative writing, racism, foreign relations, consensual relations, Keith Schmitz, interpretive literature and now?

You know all about dirty bombs? You practice this in your spare time?

Lyle=CHARLATAN

As a Veteran, I too find this blog insulting. Thank you RBC for your comments.

As a fellow vet, I have ask what the heck are you talking about?
"unaccountable ...programs"? You mean all the millions of dollars that was given out in Iraq that can't be traced? Perhaps you mean all the overcharging for defense contracts for Iraq and Afghanistan?
"Iranian wolves"? Iran is just an ankle-biter of a country. They pose no serious threat to us.
"Denying a rescue mission"? Wasn't Obama's call, and not clear what good it would have done anyway.
"bombing Libya" - that we agree on, but the last 5 or 6 presidents have done something similar.
"rules of engagement so restrictive..." - not correct.

Of course, President Romney would be worse in almost every respect. It would be nice to have an actual veteran in the White House. Barring that, I would rather not bring back the people that got us into the Iraq War. When it comes to foreign policy, Obama is clearly the better of the two.

Mr. St. Swithin,

Defense contracts and DOD spending are not part of the Dept of Veterans Affairs, which is the organization Mr. Patzfahl referred. Have you been to a VA Hospital and seen how the staff treats the veterans they are supposed to serve? Money won't fix that problem.

Iran may not be our problem....but it is Iraq's problem. We don't need to have a troop presence in Iraq, but we need to support them and we aren't.

With regard to Obama's call. Harry Truman said "The Buck Stops Here"

Obama bombed Libya far past the dates sent by the War Power Acts that dictate when congress needs to be consulted. Both Bushes got congressional authorization for their middle eastern adventures. Bill Clinton lobbing missiles at Africa was also inside the WPA timelines.

ROE---http://www.armytimes.com/news/2012/04/military-second-guessing-rules-of-engagement-sink-careers-042312w/ I agree with a ROEs, but not the type that make people on the battlefield pick between their lives and whether they get charged.

With regard to Obama and Afghanistan. Leaving the country is an endstate, not a mission or a stategic goal. Troops dying for a politically driven endstate is a pure waste and reflects poorly on Obama's priorities.

@Random,
I have been to four VA hospitals in various parts of the country. Just recently I did some volunteer work for the Milwaukee VA. For the most part the service was excellent. A special shout-out to the Durham VA. Since many of the staff are veterans themselves, they are usually quite understanding and helpful. There were issues in one of the hospitals, though. But what does this have to do with "unaccountable programs"?
Since Iraq is now ruled by Shiites (thanks to us) they are now friendly with Iran. Didn't you see the red carpet treatment for Ahmadinejad?
The Libyan rescue team is a complicated issue that has been debated in another thread. Blaming Obama is simplistic and demonstrates a poor knowledge of the issue.
I agree that the ROE can suck at times. However, all those were developed under Bush. As far as I know the Obama administration has not changed them.
As for Afghanistan, there needs to be a realistic endstate. Just saying we want a "free and democratic" nation with no real plan how to do this is just wasting troops. We missed our opportunity in the early stages when we got distracted by Iraq. Now Afghans have recovered their traditional hatred of outsiders. I have little hope that we can effect real change there, and I would like to see the money spent at home.

Your experience with the VA is significantly different than mine.

We have policy differences on Iraq. I prefer that we would continue to have influence within that country. It can only benefit us.

Ohh....the "it's complicated and you have poor knowledge defense" I would like lots more information on this issue than is being presented on conventional news outlets...wouldn't you? Why isn't Susan Rice fired yet?

When I was in Iraq, the ROE changed 4 times. It changes constantly.

I don't disagree with you on Afghanistan, we made the point long ago of don't harbor terrorists who want to fly planes into buildings -- Obama's surge was a politically driven 2008 campaign promise. So why haven't we left yet? Why the politically driven date that has nothing to do with a legimate strategy and will put people in that needless meat-grinder for another year. We could probably find some agreement on this issue, the question is could we find one with the article's author?

@Random
I did meet a temperamental doctor at the Sarasota VA hospital and I had a couple clerks at the Atlanta VA office that were complete a-holes.
We do still have influence in Iraq - through Exxon. However, we've left a big problem behind - the Kurds. When the Shiites attack the Kurds to take back Kirkuk and Mosul, which side will we be on?
I would also like more information about Libya. Unlike you I am not going to go pointing figures before the investigation is complete. From my military experience I would guess it will be found to just be a classic cluster-fuck. The higher-ups were strung out from a dozen different incidents happening around the globe. The folks close to the action couldn't figure out what was going on because you had close-in fighting in a crowded urban area in the middle of the night. With the fighting shifting from the consulate to the safe house. A drone feed is not going to clear things up much.
Yes, the ROE changes. In Iraq and Afghanistan we are bedeviled by cognitive dissonance. Supposedly they are our allies and we should not go around killing a bunch of their people. But we also want to kill the f***rs that are bombing and sniping us. So we send out a lot of young men with heavy weapons into the middle of the population. They don't have a clue about the language or the culture. So the fobbits sitting in Al Faw or Bagram keep 'adjusting' the ROE to try to balance these two opposing ideas. How is that Obama's fault?

RBC - nicely written and thank you for your service..

Did you vote for John McCain?

Please tell that to the 450 Oshkosh Truck employees and their children who are being let go before Christmas

@ Hershel Webster
Do you mean bomb-bomb-bomb Iran McCain? The guy who would have failed the Naval Academy except for his father being an Admiral? The guy who destroyed more of our aircraft than enemy aircraft? The guy who decided to support the same torture techniques that the North Vietnamese used on our soldiers. Why no, I didn't vote for him. Why do you ask?

@H.E.
Since no money has been cut from the military budget yet, you might want to look into why orders for Oshkosh trucks have been cut.

St.S, So you would put McCain more in the baby killer category than the draft dodger category? Man, you lefties are some angry SOBs, I guess you are right there are no Republicans that meet your criteria for "actual" military experience.

@H.E. Pennypacker....The employees at Oshkosh are special and shouldn't be subject to the same economic issues that the rest of the country has been subjected to?

How will Increasing unemployement by 2% will help the middle class? Shouldn't any money saved by cutting military spending be used to close the deficit?

@CowDung...By reducing government spending, the money can be used to reduce the revenue requirements. What government spending that is required can be redirected into domestic projects increasing employment in the middle class private sector. We can build a lot of bridges and repair a lot of highways for just the cost of one aircraft carrier. I would like to see some of the money put into the VA and SBA. We should be concentrating on creating 21st century jobs and businesses. War is an expensive hobby.

This is an area in which my knowledge base is incomplete so I apologize in advance if my questions are ignorant.

1. Wouldn't a war situation be regarded as temporary? That is to say, that hiring within the context of a war situation would be considered a temporary employment for the duration of the military action/need?

2. If the answer to the first question is a qualified "yes" (understanding that post-war activities/needs would preclude a return to the pre-war expense baseline), is it appropriate to designate the subsequent, logical, and expected reduction in post-military action spending as a "cut?"

This is what I understand the main components of the reductions to represent, as part of a long-range plan to decrease military spending by 2022.

http://money.cnn.com/2012/09/14/news/economy/defense-obama-romney/index.html

The economic multiplier effect of dollars spent on public infer-structure is almost 50% more than if spent on the military. Private sector spending has nearly double the domestic economic multiplier effect of military spending.

Lyle has the right idea. With private construction spending very low, roads and bridges can be built for a relative bargain and have a significant net positive economic multiplier effect.

@Jay,

I agree. I would even cut back more than Obama for a couple of years.

My beef with Obama is that less than 5% of the stimulus was on infrastructure. Too much was spent on his special interests. After Bush, I actually had somewhat of a favorable opinion of Obama in certain regard, until I saw where and how he invested our tax dollars.

Our infrastructure is an embarrassment.

Oshkosh Truck makes many different civilian trucks, from fire trucks to concrete trucks.

This is not a new issue for Oshkosh Trucks. Here's a link to an article from 08/29/1994 discussing the same topic (layoffs in the face of declining military orders) and the expressed need for commercial diversification:

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1368&dat=19940829&id=q5hQAAAAIBAJ&sjid=GxMEAAAAIBAJ&pg=3265,8878582

With your articles, it's always a challenge separating the fiction from the fiction.

Patzy wrote: "...but to return the same group of people to the White House who dropped the ball before 911..."
The people who dropped the ball were Bill Clinton and his administration. You know, the ones that dismantled the intelligence services and down played the threat of Al-Qaeda. 9-11 happened just eight months after Bush-43 took office. It's funny how you want to blame our poor economy on Bush four years after he left office, and also want to blame him for something that happened at the very start of his.

What countries have been identified (by someone other than you) as targets for Romney's alleged 'perpetual wars'? What thought process did you use to arrive at that conclusion? Was it the same thought process you used to arrive at the conclusion that Waukesha's WWTP was going to put 'flushed toilet water, full of poop' into the Root River?

@Dirk -- How does treating military people the same as non-military when it comes to early voting 'suppress' their rights? If anyone's voting rights were being suppressed, it was the rights of Ohio voters who traditionally vote early. Talk about desperate -- suppress the vote among those who you think will support your opponent and give special treatment to those who you think will support you. I think it was the GOP who looked desperate here.

This is an old story and an old lie.

The link above appears to be broken, so I'm not sure of the details.

Active military can't go down to their city hall and fill out an absentee ballot like other people can--especially those serving overseas. It also takes longer for them to get mail than those of us requesting a ballot from our locality. I see no issue with granting active duty military extra time to do their early voting. Besides, if they get their ballots late through no fault of their own, they should be allowed to return them late and have them counted...

I had no intention whatsoever to insult veterans, especially since my family is ripe with vets, but I do want to bring to your attention the way a Romney administration would treats vets compared to the way the Obama administration is treating them. They are a world apart, and Romney would send more youth to war and give them less services when they come home by cutting funding to the VA by 20% - Now that is the real insult here.

I appreciate your service - I just want you home and taken care of properly. I feel that Romney & Ryan, who have no idea what kind of sacrifice you or your family have made, could care less.... sorry, but that is the way that I see it.

@Jason
I appreciate the fact that you couldn't serve despite your claims you wanted to, however you can write such garbage without having been a member of the Military and feel that you have leg to stand on is rediculous. I hope the family members you claim are vets let you know how they feel when you sit down to Thanksgiving and they send you to the kids table in the other room.

All your argument is hypothetical, lets look at the one action that stands out in mind from your beloved President. Benghazi.... Lets take another look.... Libya...... continued Iran problems. How many active duty military members are going to die in the future due to Obama's non-action and apology tours?

Instead of writing blogs just take a laxative and then photo the toilet and post the photo. You would get the same quality article and it would take you less time.

When you have to lie to make Obama look good you should realize the ship is sinking.

I had chronic shoulder dislocations in my right arm from playing football - Only the second patient in WI to have a rear capsular shift on my shoulder 10 days after I turned 18. The marines called my house after our meeting to tell me that with such instability, I might have to look at other branches of military after a couple of years and I am re-evaluated. - By the time I was healed, I was married and a full-time college student. We are also NOT in any active wars at the time.

And you served where? when?

And I don't think you have to serve in the military to be a patriot. Do you? Reagan didn't serve overseas or see combat at all in WWII because of "eyesight difficulties." Does that make him not qualified to be President or a patriot, or have an opinion about war?

Jason wrote: "I had chronic shoulder dislocations in my right arm from playing football..."
probably from carrying more than 1/2 gallon of water to the bench at a time...
In all seriousness, the fact that you didn't "look at other branches" indicates that you were no more serious than most others.

As far as myself, I talked with military recruiters in high school, filled out my draft card, and would have gone had I been drafted. HOWEVER, I DO NOT include myself in the group of patriots that went above normal patriotism by actually volunteering and joining our armed forces to take on the archaic threats to our personal liberties.

Jason also wrote; "...And you served where? when?..."
Irrelevant. We are not discussing MY involvement in the military, just yours, or more accurately, your lack of. Please do not even attempt to put yourself in ANY category with our volunteer soldiers. You insult not only them, but yourself!