that sob was responsible for blm riots and burning down of police stations and cars....
he is a commie
-
Please read the new forum rules! REQUIRED!
Click Here: https://www.gulfcoastgunforum.com/threads/general-forum-rules-code-of-conduct.70770/
-
The New Classified Ad System is live. Please head here for details: https://gulfcoastgunforum.com/threads/new-classified-ad-system-tutorial.112735/
Kamala harris 2024
- Thread starter ahamby
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Gulf Coast States
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
he is a commie
Raven
Master
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2020
- Messages
- 9,082
- Points
- 113
If Walz has half a brain cell there won't ever be a live debate
sloporsche
Master
- Joined
- May 22, 2023
- Messages
- 1,219
- Points
- 113
i think he has to debate and defend his record/stance both will get expert coaching and numbers from their image makers
FrommerStop
Master
Walz is a sergeant bilko on steroids
Snake-Eyes
Master
That pretty much sums it up.
Didn't finish his training at the USA Segents Major Academy. MSG not a SGM as he claimed.
Southalabama
Master
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2021
- Messages
- 1,315
- Points
- 113
Rebel_Rider1969
Well Known Nuisance
Southalabama
Master
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2021
- Messages
- 1,315
- Points
- 113
Coming from a sailor man whose traversed the Great Lakes for years.
Fodderwing
Marksman
Pretty much.
Oh, a recent article described Walz as the... wait for it... "Happy-Go-Lucky candidate"!
Jesus... that's some hard-hitting journalism right there.
ABlaster
Marksman
He's a hard leftist, but he manages not to look like one when you first see him or hear him speak.
The left are masters of managing the message. Remember when they were comparing Trump and Biden after Biden won?
"America had a choice and they picked the boy who stuttered over the bully." That was when they were still blaming all the crap he said on a speech impediment.
They are really embracing "Coach" as a nickname for him (They damn sure don't want "Sarge") and I'm hearing it taking off.
The left are masters of managing the message. Remember when they were comparing Trump and Biden after Biden won?
"America had a choice and they picked the boy who stuttered over the bully." That was when they were still blaming all the crap he said on a speech impediment.
They are really embracing "Coach" as a nickname for him (They damn sure don't want "Sarge") and I'm hearing it taking off.
BluesBrother
Master
Again, biden appropriated a stutter or the drive by media appropriated it for him. There is no proof he overcame a stutter like many kids do and did. Shame for the lie. biden is just demented. They are liars. walz and kamala hell the dems are all liars. Rush, years ago, warned the dems are doing what they accuse the Republicans of. "Coach" again a lie. It's not embellishment. It's not gas lighting. It's a f---ing lie. It's what the 10 Commandments warns against. But if they are heathens, and they are, the Commandments don't mean anything to them.
Case in point. Why do we need a chief fact-checker? Because they f---ing lie.
Washington Post chief fact-checker slams Tim Walz’s claims of carrying weapons ‘in war’: ‘Sloppy and false’
'He did carry weapons of war — just not in war,' The Post's Glenn Kessler wrote on Friday
By Gabriel Hays Fox NewsPublished August 10, 2024 11:12am EDT
Last edited:
ABlaster
Marksman
As far as I can tell he was a defensive coach for a football team during his time as a teacher. Do you have other information?
Rebel_Rider1969
Well Known Nuisance
Ah, waltz another commie pedo insider. Perfect. Just what we need.
Snake-Eyes
Master
A good synopsis of the cackler’s running mate:
Snake-Eyes
Master
In case the Twitter link didn’t work for you, here’s the copy/paste from the link. I have to split it into two separate posts due to the character-count limits of the forum:
Part 1 of 2:
The Ignominy of Master Sergeant Timothy Walz
The last couple of days have been a whirlwind of controversy regarding the military service record of Democrat Vice Presidential candidate Tim Walz. My X account has seen the most traffic it has ever known as I have discussed this issue at length, and I thought it would be a good idea now to take a deep breath and kind of recap where we are at in this controversy. I know for sure that the veteran community is fired up over this issue, but I sense that many from the non-veteran community do not know what to think given the competing arguments from both sides of the political aisle. I would like to share my own personal experiences and thoughts as a retired Army Colonel and veteran of both Iraq and Afghanistan. What I hope for civilians to understand is this: the issue is not the number of years Walz served, or when he submitted his retirement paperwork, or what his final rank was, or even—just as a stand-alone proposition—whether he ever went to combat. No, the issue is the unique and special position of trust he held when he decided to walk away from his soldiers, his unit, and his nation. I’ll explain.
But first, some facts. There are all sorts of facts and disinformation flying around on this matter, so I want to highlight the most basic and most important facts, ones that not even the most rabid Democrat can dispute:
1. Walz served for 24 years in the Minnesota Army National Guard, retiring at the rank of Master Sergeant (an “E-8” in the Army).
2. In the spring of 2005, Walz was serving as the Command Sergeant Major (an “E-9”) of the 1st Battalion, 125th Field Artillery, a Minnesota Army National Guard battalion that is part of the 34th Infantry Division.
3. Also in the spring of 2005, Walz and his battalion received a warning order that the battalion would be deploying to Iraq. (We know this because Walz’s own Congressional campaign told us at the time; see the link below from the Wayback Machine.)
https://web.archive.org/web/20050420005951/http://www.timwalz.org/print.php?pr=1
4. Knowing that his unit was deploying, Walz nevertheless chose to retire from the National Guard in May of 2005 to pursue his Congressional campaign.
5. Serving members of the National Guard and the Reserves routinely also serve in Congress, and always have. Tulsi Gabbard is an excellent recent example. Walz did not necessarily need to retire to run for Congress. However, an Iraq deployment he might have instead chosen to participate in would, in fact, have prevented him from campaigning.
6. Walz’s retirement meant he did not fulfill a contractual service commitment he willingly entered into when the Army selected him to attend the United States Army Sergeants Major Academy. As a result, the Army reduced his official retirement rank from E-9 to E-8.
These are facts. Now let's explain what was so egregious in what Walz did.
So Walz retired when he was allowed to and ran for Congress instead—what’s the big deal, right? Well had Walz been some slug E-8 holding down some clerical job in the 34th Infantry Division Headquarters, counting his days until retirement, and he had opted to take a lawful retirement rather than go to Iraq, no one would care. But that’s not what happened. Walz was a COMMAND SERGEANT MAJOR (“CSM”), and that makes all the difference in the world.
A CSM is the senior NCO in an Army battalion. He is the battalion commander’s most trusted advisor. He is the standard-setter for every other NCO and junior enlisted soldier in that battalion. All eyes are on him. He is as close to a god on Earth as a soldier could ever be. The rank and position of a CSM is exceptionally hard to attain—very few NCOs ever make it. More importantly, taking on the duties of a CSM is a sacred trust. The 500+ soldiers in your battalion are trusting you to train them and hold them to a standard where they can fight, win and survive in combat. Those soldiers put their faith, trust and lives in your hands. I'll say it again: this is a sacred trust. I’ll now be blunt. In the spring of 2005, Walz walked away from that sacred trust by abandoning his post when he learned of an upcoming Iraq deployment. He was a coward. He was a quitter. He placed his own self interest over that of his soldiers. He was an NCO Courtney Massengale (IYKYK).
It is at this point that I would like to share a relevant personal anecdote to explain what it means when a CSM walks away on the eve of combat. When I was a battalion commander, just a few weeks before we were about to deploy to Afghanistan, and after we had done our intensive Joint Readiness Training Center rotation with the team we were taking to the fight--my CSM was relieved by the Division Commanding General because the CSM did something particularly stupid involving a junior enlisted soldier and got caught. I cannot describe how disruptive that was. It was like having the beating heart ripped out of my battalion. We overcame it, but it was tough—and it upset the entire NCO chain as we had to elevate multiple NCOs in the chain of responsibility to new positions they had not trained in, all because of our CSM being relieved. That disruption could have resulted in deaths in combat (thankfully it did not). If you are an Army battalion commander, NO ONE is more important than your CSM. So yeah--I understand the impact of Walz's cowardice better than almost all of the other people on this planet.
(Someone asked me in good faith whether or not Walz simply left one kind of service for a higher level of service in Congress. I thought long and hard about an appropriate analogy as an answer to that question, and finally came up with one: what Walz did is the moral equivalent of a mother dropping off her five pre-teen children at an orphanage in the dead of night so she could run for Congress. Yes, it’s that bad.)https://x.com/CynicalPublius/article/1821768321630679397/media/1821762232080113664
Part 1 of 2:
The Ignominy of Master Sergeant Timothy Walz
The last couple of days have been a whirlwind of controversy regarding the military service record of Democrat Vice Presidential candidate Tim Walz. My X account has seen the most traffic it has ever known as I have discussed this issue at length, and I thought it would be a good idea now to take a deep breath and kind of recap where we are at in this controversy. I know for sure that the veteran community is fired up over this issue, but I sense that many from the non-veteran community do not know what to think given the competing arguments from both sides of the political aisle. I would like to share my own personal experiences and thoughts as a retired Army Colonel and veteran of both Iraq and Afghanistan. What I hope for civilians to understand is this: the issue is not the number of years Walz served, or when he submitted his retirement paperwork, or what his final rank was, or even—just as a stand-alone proposition—whether he ever went to combat. No, the issue is the unique and special position of trust he held when he decided to walk away from his soldiers, his unit, and his nation. I’ll explain.
But first, some facts. There are all sorts of facts and disinformation flying around on this matter, so I want to highlight the most basic and most important facts, ones that not even the most rabid Democrat can dispute:
1. Walz served for 24 years in the Minnesota Army National Guard, retiring at the rank of Master Sergeant (an “E-8” in the Army).
2. In the spring of 2005, Walz was serving as the Command Sergeant Major (an “E-9”) of the 1st Battalion, 125th Field Artillery, a Minnesota Army National Guard battalion that is part of the 34th Infantry Division.
3. Also in the spring of 2005, Walz and his battalion received a warning order that the battalion would be deploying to Iraq. (We know this because Walz’s own Congressional campaign told us at the time; see the link below from the Wayback Machine.)
https://web.archive.org/web/20050420005951/http://www.timwalz.org/print.php?pr=1
4. Knowing that his unit was deploying, Walz nevertheless chose to retire from the National Guard in May of 2005 to pursue his Congressional campaign.
5. Serving members of the National Guard and the Reserves routinely also serve in Congress, and always have. Tulsi Gabbard is an excellent recent example. Walz did not necessarily need to retire to run for Congress. However, an Iraq deployment he might have instead chosen to participate in would, in fact, have prevented him from campaigning.
6. Walz’s retirement meant he did not fulfill a contractual service commitment he willingly entered into when the Army selected him to attend the United States Army Sergeants Major Academy. As a result, the Army reduced his official retirement rank from E-9 to E-8.
These are facts. Now let's explain what was so egregious in what Walz did.
So Walz retired when he was allowed to and ran for Congress instead—what’s the big deal, right? Well had Walz been some slug E-8 holding down some clerical job in the 34th Infantry Division Headquarters, counting his days until retirement, and he had opted to take a lawful retirement rather than go to Iraq, no one would care. But that’s not what happened. Walz was a COMMAND SERGEANT MAJOR (“CSM”), and that makes all the difference in the world.
A CSM is the senior NCO in an Army battalion. He is the battalion commander’s most trusted advisor. He is the standard-setter for every other NCO and junior enlisted soldier in that battalion. All eyes are on him. He is as close to a god on Earth as a soldier could ever be. The rank and position of a CSM is exceptionally hard to attain—very few NCOs ever make it. More importantly, taking on the duties of a CSM is a sacred trust. The 500+ soldiers in your battalion are trusting you to train them and hold them to a standard where they can fight, win and survive in combat. Those soldiers put their faith, trust and lives in your hands. I'll say it again: this is a sacred trust. I’ll now be blunt. In the spring of 2005, Walz walked away from that sacred trust by abandoning his post when he learned of an upcoming Iraq deployment. He was a coward. He was a quitter. He placed his own self interest over that of his soldiers. He was an NCO Courtney Massengale (IYKYK).
It is at this point that I would like to share a relevant personal anecdote to explain what it means when a CSM walks away on the eve of combat. When I was a battalion commander, just a few weeks before we were about to deploy to Afghanistan, and after we had done our intensive Joint Readiness Training Center rotation with the team we were taking to the fight--my CSM was relieved by the Division Commanding General because the CSM did something particularly stupid involving a junior enlisted soldier and got caught. I cannot describe how disruptive that was. It was like having the beating heart ripped out of my battalion. We overcame it, but it was tough—and it upset the entire NCO chain as we had to elevate multiple NCOs in the chain of responsibility to new positions they had not trained in, all because of our CSM being relieved. That disruption could have resulted in deaths in combat (thankfully it did not). If you are an Army battalion commander, NO ONE is more important than your CSM. So yeah--I understand the impact of Walz's cowardice better than almost all of the other people on this planet.
(Someone asked me in good faith whether or not Walz simply left one kind of service for a higher level of service in Congress. I thought long and hard about an appropriate analogy as an answer to that question, and finally came up with one: what Walz did is the moral equivalent of a mother dropping off her five pre-teen children at an orphanage in the dead of night so she could run for Congress. Yes, it’s that bad.)https://x.com/CynicalPublius/article/1821768321630679397/media/1821762232080113664
Snake-Eyes
Master
Part 2 of 2:
Walz’s ignominy was more than just abandoning his troops; it also reflects some sort of personal deficit in his character and make-up. For almost every professional soldier I have ever known, the idea of not going to war with his or her unit is a hateful thing. Please let me tell you another story to illustrate. One of the things that the Army makes a battalion do when it deploys to war is to leave back in the USA a "Rear Detachment." It's a very small group of soldiers who cover important administrative and logistical matters back home. The Rear Detachment is also the hub of the civilian spouse-led "Family Readiness Group," keeping spouses and kids informed and--Heaven forbid--helping families if one of your soldiers is killed or wounded. There are different schools of thought as to who a battalion commander should leave in charge of that Rear Detachment. Some battalion commanders leave their worst Lieutenant or Captain behind. When my battalion went to Afghanistan, I chose to leave my very best First Lieutenant behind. The job is just that important. When I called this Lieutenant into my office to tell him that he was being left behind to command the Rear Detachment, this stoic, hard-core, physical training stud, Jumpmaster, Ranger-qualified, combat medic Lieutenant broke down and boo-hoo cried, tears and all. He begged me not to leave him behind. Being left behind while the rest of the battalion and his company deployed was sheer heartbreak to him. He ended up doing the Rear Detachment Commander job extremely well, but I'm not sure he ever forgave me. Most military leaders are like that. They will extend retirement dates. They will hide injuries. They will cancel a permanent change of station move or a desirable military school. Hell, many will even get divorced rather than not deploy to war. They will do any and all of those things to avoid not deploying with their unit. True military leaders are like that: the most dishonorable thing imaginable is to not go to war with your comrades. But not Tim Walz. He was a battalion Command Sergeant Major--the most senior and important NCO in a battalion--and he bailed, ran and hid rather than deploy with his soldiers to Iraq and do his duty.
So right about now I can hear my midwit Democrat pals shouting “WHAT ABOUT CADET BONESPURS, HMMMMM!?!?” To which I easily say: Trump did not serve. Neither did Clinton. Nor Obama. Nor Biden. Nor Harris. But cutting and running in the face of the enemy and abandoning the troops you were sworn to lead AS THEIR SENIOR NONCOMMISSIONED OFFICER is 1,000 times worse than never serving at all.
Incredibly, it gets worse. Not only did Walz abandon his sacred duty to his soldiers to pursue a self-serving political goal, he then went and bragged politically about the honorable leadership as a CSM that he never provided. He took credit for a rank he never fulfilled, he lied about his service in war, and he cynically did all of this for no other reason than personal gain. This is despicable stolen valor, and reflects this man’s lack of honor, integrity and good character.
If Master Sergeant (Ret.) Walz could not be trusted to fulfill the duties he had to his soldiers, his unit and his nation in 2005, how can he be trusted to be Vice President in 2025? Tim Walz is not qualified to be a municipal dogcatcher, let alone Vice President of the United States of America.
Walz's egregious behavior boils the blood of veterans who left a part of their soul in Mosul, or Fallujah, or Kandahar, or Ramadi, or Khowst--or any of the other cities or open spaces where their friends died. Veterans and non-veterans alike, please vote accordingly. Keep the heat on please. If all it does is cause 10,000 veterans to turn out in Pennsylvania or Wisconsin who might not have done so otherwise, we win. This is a vital issue—make Walz and the Democrats pay for their perfidy.
<end>
Walz’s ignominy was more than just abandoning his troops; it also reflects some sort of personal deficit in his character and make-up. For almost every professional soldier I have ever known, the idea of not going to war with his or her unit is a hateful thing. Please let me tell you another story to illustrate. One of the things that the Army makes a battalion do when it deploys to war is to leave back in the USA a "Rear Detachment." It's a very small group of soldiers who cover important administrative and logistical matters back home. The Rear Detachment is also the hub of the civilian spouse-led "Family Readiness Group," keeping spouses and kids informed and--Heaven forbid--helping families if one of your soldiers is killed or wounded. There are different schools of thought as to who a battalion commander should leave in charge of that Rear Detachment. Some battalion commanders leave their worst Lieutenant or Captain behind. When my battalion went to Afghanistan, I chose to leave my very best First Lieutenant behind. The job is just that important. When I called this Lieutenant into my office to tell him that he was being left behind to command the Rear Detachment, this stoic, hard-core, physical training stud, Jumpmaster, Ranger-qualified, combat medic Lieutenant broke down and boo-hoo cried, tears and all. He begged me not to leave him behind. Being left behind while the rest of the battalion and his company deployed was sheer heartbreak to him. He ended up doing the Rear Detachment Commander job extremely well, but I'm not sure he ever forgave me. Most military leaders are like that. They will extend retirement dates. They will hide injuries. They will cancel a permanent change of station move or a desirable military school. Hell, many will even get divorced rather than not deploy to war. They will do any and all of those things to avoid not deploying with their unit. True military leaders are like that: the most dishonorable thing imaginable is to not go to war with your comrades. But not Tim Walz. He was a battalion Command Sergeant Major--the most senior and important NCO in a battalion--and he bailed, ran and hid rather than deploy with his soldiers to Iraq and do his duty.
So right about now I can hear my midwit Democrat pals shouting “WHAT ABOUT CADET BONESPURS, HMMMMM!?!?” To which I easily say: Trump did not serve. Neither did Clinton. Nor Obama. Nor Biden. Nor Harris. But cutting and running in the face of the enemy and abandoning the troops you were sworn to lead AS THEIR SENIOR NONCOMMISSIONED OFFICER is 1,000 times worse than never serving at all.
Incredibly, it gets worse. Not only did Walz abandon his sacred duty to his soldiers to pursue a self-serving political goal, he then went and bragged politically about the honorable leadership as a CSM that he never provided. He took credit for a rank he never fulfilled, he lied about his service in war, and he cynically did all of this for no other reason than personal gain. This is despicable stolen valor, and reflects this man’s lack of honor, integrity and good character.
If Master Sergeant (Ret.) Walz could not be trusted to fulfill the duties he had to his soldiers, his unit and his nation in 2005, how can he be trusted to be Vice President in 2025? Tim Walz is not qualified to be a municipal dogcatcher, let alone Vice President of the United States of America.
Walz's egregious behavior boils the blood of veterans who left a part of their soul in Mosul, or Fallujah, or Kandahar, or Ramadi, or Khowst--or any of the other cities or open spaces where their friends died. Veterans and non-veterans alike, please vote accordingly. Keep the heat on please. If all it does is cause 10,000 veterans to turn out in Pennsylvania or Wisconsin who might not have done so otherwise, we win. This is a vital issue—make Walz and the Democrats pay for their perfidy.
<end>
Rebel_Rider1969
Well Known Nuisance
How old was he when he did this? Recently?
Snake-Eyes
Master
He was 41 when he retired from the ANG back in 2005.
Members online
- RVGuru
- willmeggy
- safetyfirst
- shootersid94
- fl8216
- BDK1972
- Viking1204
- bohica793
- 5lima30ret
- Narrow Gap
- bsmallz01
- NPRUSE#99
- lb86
- 850guns
- jesse526
- zombieh8r
- scrappyfisci
- TheGuyWhoLearns
- Cardsfan15
- Gingershooter
- Brockskennedy
- LemonHead
- Mooman62
- hunter01
- freedom1965
- Gunrunner96
- MiguelAR
- Amaury Lopez
- Flounder Hounder
- Shaqw427
- sagillman
- chucker55
- Bearmann556