Reply With QuoteOk, so the guy made a mistake. Your point being???
17 or 71? whats the difference?
"Asked by a moderator how many US soldiers had died in Iraq this month, Republican incumbent Geoff Davis answered "17". The actual number is 71."
Video
Ok, so the guy made a mistake. Your point being???
his point being that his world is clouded by politics and cannot see anything past it. im sure he never made a mistake or transposed numbers. what a stupid post.
point being that at the very least, he should know the numbers. He didnt even try to correct himself after it was pointed out that he was wrong. Another "catastrophic success"?
Originally Posted by Secret Squirrel
You sir are pathetic.
if you think it's pathetic to expect a Congressman to know the number of soldiers who have died fighting in Iraq in any given month, then yep I'm pathetic. Personally, I find it sickening that you dont have a problem with people who support the war (or even if they dont support it and want an end) but arent in touch with the true cost. I guess in his mind, this was a "good" month for casualties.
Yes this is an outrage. I'm sure that every member of the house and senate, as well as every member of the administration and all cabinet appointees can quote monthly casualty numbers dating back at least 5 years. In addition, since they also bear equal responsibility for civilian policies - which result in far more deaths, they can quote similar data from all the other programs they are responsible for - US highway deaths, deaths in US hospitals, murder/assault/rape numbers for all major US cities, suicide numbers for all states, the number of bicyclists killed by motor vehicles etc. And the really responsible ones can even quote CAFE gas mileage numbers for all manufacturers selling cars in the US.
Ummm... I'm sure they can do that.
Well I mean come on. Waging war, the necessity to win etc. will not turn on the difference between numbers so small. If he said 17 and the actual number was 2500, we'd have a problem here. I would expect commanders on the ground to be quite familiar with these stats, but people in congress have a lot to manage, and people are paid to track these things for them. This is not like when Democratic Rep Sheila Jackson Lee, member of the House Committee on Science, asked NASA if the Mars rovers would be able to drive over and see where Neil Armstrong planted the flag in 1969. That's scary.
.............
Its a good thing I wasn't drinking when I heard this. It definitely would've come out of my nose.
He went into a political debate without actually knowing the number of troops killed in what is the highest number of U.S soldiers killed in 2006 and it's going to be one of the worst months of the entire war. And this from a congressman who takes a lot of pleasure in reminding others of his military service. Oh yea, it's completely ridiculas to explect him to know this...it's not like Iraq is a big political problem or is even being mentioned in the upcoming election...but i'm glad you feel comfortable having a laugh and comparing comments about a mars rover to dead soldiers...carry on...
After reading the initial post I decided to check on Congressman Davis' credentials.
Congressman Davis enlisted in the United States Army upon completion of high school. While on enlisted status, he received an appointment to the United States Military Academy at West Point from which he graduated. During his military service he was assigned to the 82nd Airborne Division as an aviator. Mr. Davis is a former Army Ranger and is a member in the U.S. Army Ranger Association as well as the 82nd Airborne Association.
Armed Services Committee:
Subcommittee on Strategic Forces
Subcommittee on Terrorism, Unconventional Threats and Capabilities
Financial Services Committee:
Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Insurance and Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs)
Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations
________________________
Nothing in Mr. Davis' biography suggests he is insensitive to the military men and women serving in Iraq. Unfortunately in this era of highly partisan politics any anecdotal misstep will be used to foster an agenda driven perspective. The initial post was not substantive, nor did I find it particularly compelling. It was simply based on conjecture, which tried to lead one to believe Mr. Davis is not current on Iraq and disinterested in the human cost of the war. While both might be the case, neither was proven by Mr. Davis stating 17 military personnel rather than 71 personnel have died in October in Iraq. (Sounds more like a problem with dyslexia.)
It seems to me it is far more simple to state Mr. Davis is an incumbent Republican, who supports the current policy in Iraq. If you disagree with Mr. Davis' position, consider voting against him in the upcoming election.
Semper Fidelis
17 sounds better.
Do you put yourself under the same magnifying glass? I bet you never make mistakes. Don't get so wrapped up in politics....
Posting Permissions
