Should the Obama campaign expose the fact that Romney is a draft dodger?

[TroyD]

Many Americans may not know that after campaigning in favor of the Vietnam War, Mitt ran off to France for several years and never served, while thousands of other men of his generation did (and died).

And neither Mitt nor any of his 5 sons have ever served.

There are some Veterans for Obama groups that I talk to online that are doing this, but the Obama Campaign itself has not gone there yet.

Should Romney not be exposed as the fraud he is when he talks about his dedication to the military and service?

[MADem]

1. Obama shouldn't touch that with a forty foot pole. That doesn't mean WE can't mention it,

early and often.

[WI_DEM]

2. No there is enough to hit him with without going there.

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

10. seeing as how Willard took part in a rally supporting the draft, it's highly relevant

it shows how he has one set of rules for him self, and another for the serfs

[msongs]

3. seems to be what romney did was perfectly legal. took an available out as did many others nt

[TroyD]

4. It's not an issue of whether it's legal

The issue is:

1) He got multiple deferments that other men didn't, an example of privilege as a result of being a Governor's son (would remind people of George W. Bush)

2) Argued in FAVOR of the Vietnam War and then avoided it

3) Claims to be dedicated to the military and yet neither he nor his 5 sons have served in it

Sen. Jim Webb hinted at this the other day, but I think it's time to hit Romney harder on it and drive down his numbers with veterans.

[hexola]

6. Obama would have a better hand here if he had served.

Hard to call another guy out on this stuff if you haven't done it yourself.

[braddy]

5. I have pointed out here that Mitt refused to serve, but so did Obama, I am not a fan of people

pretending that not serving during the draft years of 1948 to 1973, is different than not serving since the draft ended.

How does a non-vet, attack another non-vet for not wanting to serve?

[Mnemosyne]

7. What draft did the President refuse to serve under? Thanks. I do agree that it should not be used as

an attack, in this case. Seriously, what war did Preident Obama avoid?

And FYI, our President was too young for those years, 1948 - 1973.

[braddy]

12. Read my post, the draft has nothing to do with anything. the fact that someone doesn't want to serve

is the only question. As a veteran who enlisted in the Army during Vietnam, and after I had won a permanent draft deferment, I have paid attention to this kind of thing for many decades. (By the way Vietnam was primarily fought by volunteers, unlike WWII, which was a draftee war.)

Romney didn't want to serve, and Obama didn't want to serve, there is nothing special about having come of military age during the draft years or the volunteer military years or coming of age during the Vietnam war instead of at any other time. Non vets can't attack the other candidate for not being a vet.

If you think that vets would be pleased with that bizarre line of attack, then you are mistaken.

[TroyD]

8. How many times must this be stated?

Argued in FAVOR of the Vietnam War and then avoided it

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

11. Obama was 6 years old at the height of Vietnam - false equivalence

and the president certainly didn't rally for other people to get drafted in his place, like Mitt did

[braddy]

13. The equivalency is refusing to enlist, Vietnam has nothing to do with that, there is nothing special

about the Vietnam era, or not serving in 1956, or 1976, or 1986, or 1996, or 2006, it's all the same, non-vets can't attack other non-vets.

Two guys want to send Americans to war as Commander of America's war forces, and neither one wanted to serve themself.

[jmowreader]

9. It didn't hurt Bush and Cheney

Both of them liked everything about Vietnam except the idea of going themselves.

The attack didn't work when we ran Vietnam vets against Bush, and Obama didn't serve either.

More effective would be to point out that Mitt wants an army designed to fight the Soviets; an army designed to fight terrorists would be Special Ops-heavy and that would be relatively cheap.