About us Login Get email updates
Quick Clip
Print

Cavuto hosts "Gunny Bob" Newman, who slams Obama administration, cites "Hanoi John" Kerry's "early discharge"

September 29, 2009 5:21 pm ET

From the September 29 edition of Fox News' Your World with Neil Cavuto:

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED

Fox News hosts "terror expert Bob Newman" to discuss Holocaust Museum shooting

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by eastside_sinatra (September 29, 2009 5:33 pm ET)
      1  
      I trust Bob Newhart more than Bob Newman....
      Report Abuse
    • Author by worrierking (September 29, 2009 5:39 pm ET)
      3  
      This lowlife thinks it's time that the military stopped answering to civilians.

      WTF is wrong with these people and this country?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by wzwriter (September 29, 2009 5:41 pm ET)
      3  
      Gunny Bob is the worst thing to come out of Colorado since the Columbine shooters. And his stupidity and hatred are just as deadly.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by wzwriter (September 29, 2009 5:42 pm ET)
      6  
      I think Gunny Bob's problem is he has a "early discharge" all the time, if you get my drift.......
      Report Abuse
    • Author by alien13ufo (September 29, 2009 5:44 pm ET)
      1  
      how did obama "avoid" military service? Last I heard we had a volunteer military, and at no point during his eligibility was there a draft. So does that make anyone who chooses not to join the service, "avoiding" it?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by jmille426471 (September 29, 2009 7:14 pm ET)
      3  
      Yeah, John Kerry should have weaselled his way out of service, like Bush, Cheney, Newt, Limbaugh and countless other major right-wing figures.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by snoopy (September 29, 2009 7:37 pm ET)
        3  
        My dad and a few thousand other marines really enjoyed watching Pat Robertson debark in japan before the troop ship headed to Inchon.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by jmille426471 (September 29, 2009 8:12 pm ET)
          2  
          Interesting story, Snoopy. Just curious, what was the rev's disability: asthma, obesity, knee pain or arse boils?

          Or did he just have better things to do, like old Dick?
          Report Abuse
          • Author by worrierking (September 29, 2009 8:36 pm ET)
            2  
            He was the son of a US Senator and had no disability. Like another famous Christian, his father (biological, not heavenly) pulled strings. He did stay in the military as a liquor officer whatever the hell that is.

            Not long ago Pat leg pressed 2,000 pounds. Not bad for a guy in his seventies. The world record at the time was slightly more than 2,000 lbs. and held by a much younger guy. So Pat's wasn't disabled while in the military. Unless his close, personal friend Jesus healed him.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by fairliberal (September 29, 2009 9:34 pm ET)
              1 5
              Like another famous Christian, his father (biological, not heavenly) pulled strings.

              Why bring up the Kennedys?
              Report Abuse
              • Author by worrierking (September 29, 2009 10:29 pm ET)
                3 1
                You rotten piece of filth.

                Say what you want about the Kennedy's but they gave three sons lives for this country.
                Report Abuse
            • Author by jmille426471 (September 29, 2009 9:55 pm ET)
              2  
              I heard about Pat leg-pressing 2000 lbs. I'll believe when I see it. I did see him do ten reps at 1,000, so it's possible........
              Report Abuse
      • Author by fairliberal (September 29, 2009 9:32 pm ET)
        1 3
        Bush served if you recall, that is more than Clinton or Obama did. If Clinton had put the same effort into serving that he did into dodging, he would have been a 5 Star General.

        And since you mentioned Cheney, did Biden serve? And since you mentioned Newt did Harry Reid or Nancy Pelosi serve? And since you mentioned Limbaugh , did Olbermann serve?
        Report Abuse
        • Author by eweston8542983 (September 29, 2009 11:15 pm ET)
          2 1
          Biden was rejected for medical reasons.
          You have access to Shurbs complete military record?
          Report Abuse
        • Author by jmille426471 (September 29, 2009 11:40 pm ET)
          2 1
          Reid, Pelosi and Olbermann don't run around calling for wars/tough foreign policy while accusing those who don't support said wars of being wusses/unpatriotic. Many cons seem to think that the fact that they cheer wars on from afar gives them the right to call others unpatriotic for not doing so.

          That's why we coined the term "chickenhawk" for so many GOP luminaries.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by worrierking (September 30, 2009 7:33 am ET)
          4  
          The difference between these people is that your heroes Dick Cheney, Rush Limbaugh and George W. Bush supported the war that they themselves actively evaded. Clinton did not support the Vietnam War but he did avoid it. No shame there as far as I'm concerned.

          George W. Bush did serve in the NG. His family pulled strings for him to get in before others who had been on the waiting list. In his paperwork, he checked the box that said he'd prefer to not serve overseas.

          He supported the war, but found a legal way to do his part. I don't really blame him for that.

          Cheney and Rush are all together different. Both failed miserably by supporting a war that they purposely avoided. Their support for the war, and their evasion of service, caused two other men to go in their places. Men who had no other options. Men who may have supported or may have opposed the war that these two slugs were very much in favor of, as long as it was someone else putting their ass on the line.

          For as long as you've been commenting here, you bring up this false equivalence. You don't seem to grasp the concept of honor. I won't pass judgement on George W. Bush's honor for going to the head of the list and joining the NG.

          But every time you bring up your rebuttal to defend men who caused others to fight a war that the evaders purposely evaded, I'll be here to condemn you for it.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by Tbone Slickens (September 30, 2009 9:04 am ET)
            1 2
            Clinton did not support the Vietnam War but he did avoid it.


            I seem to remember a certain William J. Clinton going to England to "study" during the time he should have been serving as you assert.

            Also reference Bill's letter to the head of the AR ROTC to get a glimpse into his mindset. To refresh your memory, he wrote of "loathing the military". That sounds like someone READY to rally to the flag!
            Report Abuse
          • Author by LKL (September 30, 2009 11:45 am ET)
            2  
            I wish I could give that more than one thumbs up, Worrierking.
            Report Abuse
        • Author by Tbone Slickens (September 30, 2009 9:00 am ET)
          1 2
          Also these bellyaching loons forget that Cheney served as the Sec of Defense. HE oversaw the Panama operation and the first Gulf War. He has done more for the fighting men and women of this country than all the above demorats combined.

          I'll put his record up against the dems SOD's anyday. Cohen and Aspin...now there are two oxygen thieves if there ever was.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by jmille426471 (September 30, 2009 9:48 am ET)
            2  
            You're a riot, tbone.

            So sitting in an office in the pentagon = overseeing an operation, much less risking one's life in the line of fire? That won't cut it. Just listen to Jesse ventura tell it like it is, he seems like a guy you'd like (start at 3 minutes in for epic awesomeness).

            Furthermore William Cohen "oversaw" (using your parlance) an operation in Kosovo in which genocide was stopped and there were no NATO casualties (the real credit goes to general Clarke of course, but never mind). Or maybe your definition of success is the massive bungles in Iraq and Afghanistan?

            I know this may shock you, but the fact Cohen and Aspin did not march us into needless and costly wars does not make them failures, it makes them the opposite.

            Anyways, the fact remains that so many who now pretend to be the FIERCE, BRAVE defenders of the republic chickened out when they had a chance to do battle for their country. That glaring fact aint going anywhere.

            Report Abuse
            • Author by Tbone Slickens (October 01, 2009 3:40 pm ET)
              1  
              I see you left out Somalia in your little screed. Then next time you watch Blackhawk Down, remember that Les Aspin was the one man responsible for that disaster. He had the blood on his hands.

              Not every one can be a SOF tough guy. There has to be leadership at the top and the fact that Cheney was the best at that job in the last thirty years just chaps your rear I'm sure.

              You are right about one thing though (sort of). Our little jaunt in the Balkans didn't produce NATO casualties on par with a real shooting war (OJE was considered low risk) there were casualties, mostly training accidents and a couple of mine deaths. There were however MANY deaths of the people we were sent there to protect. That is because of weak kneed leadership from the Clinton Admin. They were adverse to a shooting war and proved it time and again by relying on cruise missiles for strikes against aspirin factories and standing by idly while refugees were being killed.

              Cohen and Aspin. I worked under both and neither could hold a candle to Cheney (who I worked for also).
              Report Abuse
    • Author by osusnowman8 (September 29, 2009 8:49 pm ET)
        1
      The most upsetting part of this, is the doctor cub scout analogy. So when it comes to war Obama should trust his advisers, but to have how ever many Czars is a travesty.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by worrierking (September 30, 2009 2:09 pm ET)
        1  
        Obama should take what his advisors say under advisement.

        Then he should decide what he believes is the best thing for the country.
        Sometimes, a president has to learn to stand up to his advisors who are pushing to win a war when no one can explain what winning entails.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by Chrys_Naples_FL (September 30, 2009 8:04 am ET)
      2  
      "...and frankly, given how President Obama avoided military service..."
      (at 0:57/3:27)

      Excuse me???


      1. Obama was born August 4, 1961.

      2. On Jan. 27, 1973, Secretary of Defense Melvin R. Laird announced the creation of an all-volunteer armed forces, negating the need for the military draft. (Wikipedia)

      3. By simple math, I figure Obama turned 12 in 1973.

      So he "avoided" military service by refusing to volunteer for an all-volunteer army???
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Chrys_Naples_FL (September 30, 2009 8:16 am ET)
         
      Another mis statement:
      Wikipedia "Kerry had agreed to an extension of his active duty obligation from December 1969 to August 1970 in order to perform Swift Boat duty,[33][34] but in January, 1970, he requested early discharge in order to run for Congress the following fall. He was discharged from active duty on March 1, 1970.

      John Kerry was on active duty in the United States Navy from August 1966 until January 1970. He continued to serve in the Naval Reserve until February 1978. "

      Isn't it a bit misleading to say he was 'discharged early' when he fully discharged his draft obligations? He was released early from a voluntary extention...going above and beyond his obligations.
      Report Abuse